Additional Details Revealed For 20th Anniversary Reissue Of Nirvana’s “Nevermind”
More details have surfaced regarding the upcoming 20th anniversary reissue of Nirvana‘s “Nevermind“. The effort will see a re-release on September 27th through UME in a variety of configurations with previously unreleased bonus material. The official press release can be found below:
“Released in September 1991, Nirvana‘s sophomore album and major label debut elevated Kurt Cobain, Krist Novoselic and Dave Grohl from a critically acclaimed Aberdeen, Washington, cult band to generational spokesmen who’d unwittingly created a cultural shift and musical touchstone.
Rising to No. 1 the world over by year’s end and ultimately selling over 30 million copies worldwide, Nevermind would come to be much more than one of the most successful and influential albums of its or any era. As the album that returned unaffected rock ’n’ roll integrity and passion to the top of the charts, Nevermind would prove a singular inspiration to fans and musicians alike over the last two decades–and will undoubtedly do so for generations to come.
Now on the occasion of Nevermind‘s 20th anniversary, Universal Music Enterprises presents a full spectrum re-release worthy of such a pivotal classic. With configurations ranging from a 4-CD/1-DVD Super Deluxe Edition to a standard digital/CD remaster of the original album, the 20th anniversary reissue of Nevermind makes the most of the occasion, unearthing literally dozens of previously unreleased recordings, obscure B-sides, alternate mixes, radio sessions, studio rarities and live recordings, including a 1991 Halloween concert at Seattle’s Paramount Theatre in its entirety.
The limited, numbered Super Deluxe Edition more than lives up to its name as one of the most expansive and ambitious collections of its kind with only 10,000 copies available in North America, and another 30,000 for the rest of the world. The Super Deluxe features not only the original remastered album and accompanying studio and live B-sides, but the first full official release of the pre-Nevermind demos recorded at producer Butch Vig’s Smart Studios, as well as boombox recordings of subsequent rehearsals through which the listener can actually experience “Smells Like Teen Spirit,” “Come As You Are,” “On A Plain” and others that take shape before his or her very ears.
The Super Deluxe also offers an altogether new perspective on the finished Nevermind album exclusive to this format in the form of the Devonshire Mixes: the album as produced and mixed by Vig as opposed to the commercially released final version produced by Vig and mixed by Andy Wallace.
Rounding out the Super Deluxe are a pair of previously unreleased BBC recordings and the aforementioned 1991 Paramount show available for the first time and exclusive to this format on CD and DVD (which also features all four music videos from Nevermind), as well as a stunning 90-page bound book full of rarely and never- before-seen photos, documents and various other visual artifacts of the Nevermind era.
The Nirvana Nevermind 20th anniversary reissue is also available as a 2-CD Deluxe Edition featuring the remastered album and B-sides, the Smart Studio sessions, boombox rehearsals and BBC sessions, a 4-LP, 180-gram heavyweight vinyl edition featuring the same 40 tracks as the Deluxe Edition, a remastered CD of the original album, and digital versions of the standard and deluxe editions.
The Paramount concert, transferred from 16mm film and multi-track audio, is the only known Nirvana concert shot to film and will be available in a 1080p high-definition picture and uncompressed 5.1 surround sound and stereo on stand-alone Blu-ray, along with DVD and digital long form video formats.”
Loading ...
COMMENTS
I might get crucified for this, but would someone please explain to me Nirvana’s apparently timeless appeal? I didn’t really get into rock music until after the grunge wave was on the way out, so maybe it’s a generational thing, or maybe I just grew sick of hearing them constantly on the radio, but I’ve never found their music very interesting. I’m not saying they’re “bad”–I’ve just never understood the attraction and have always thought that other grunge acts (e.g. Soundgarden, and to the extent that they’re grunge, Local H) pulled it off much better and more memorably.
I actually agree with you. I worked with 17 yr old kids who said Nirvana is the greatest band ever, and I look at them like, “Kid, you were swimming in your dad’s balls when Nirvana came out”. They changed the landscape of music, but weren’t around long enough to make a huge impact. Shit, Foo Fighters have lasted longer than Nirvana did.
I think Nirvana are one of those bands that once you like them, there isn’t really much that is going to change that. I’ve heard Smells Like Teen Spirit till my arse hurts but i still enjoy it. Hairspray Queen is still one of my fav tracks of all time and it’s a peice of shit. It’s very hard to explain to someone who doesn’t dig them.
They’re like Guns n’ Roses. One good, influential album, and they’re legends forever. Disregard (or, for pun’s sake, nevermind) the fact that 90% of their released material was dated and quite bad.
Also, hearing a bunch of b-side, demo, boombox recorded, and radio takes of the same songs over and over is hardly a selling point, unless you’re absolutely OBSESSED. I for one wouldn’t want to hear a terrible garage recording of one of my favorite bands. I prefer to hear them exactly they want to be heard, not the skeletons of their past closets.
@Obi-Juan Valdez. The amount of time they were around, and the impact they had on music in such a short time frame, and still have is what makes them amazing for people. Without Nirvana, most people wouldn’t have had the chance to hear such bands as Soundgarden, or Alice in Chains (Who were both signed before Nirvana, and had albums out already). Nirvana’s popularity made it possible for those band’s to get even more recognition then they might have. They brought the Seattle sound and scene to the masses, and with that helped make those band’s who they’re today. Almost any “grunge” band from Seattle during that time has at some point made this comment. The guy wrote with his heart, and not with money on his mind, and not enough people give him credit for that. Kurt was a rare musician, and we likely won’t see one like him at this level of fame ever again.
Also, why does it matter if he was still swimming in his dads nut sack when Nirvana was around? I was a many years away from even being born when the Beatles were around, and I still think they’re one of the greatest bands ever. Also the Foo Fighters have been around 7 years longer then the Beatles were, and that literally means jack shit.
Also, aside from the first 2 albums, Foo Fighters are pretty bland for the most part.
Kudos for the good responses, all.
@Obi-Juan Valdez: I actually do enjoy the Foo Fighters more than Nirvana. But, as others have already pointed, longevity isn’t necessarily the best measure of greatness. The usual example I think of (though there are better) is Rage Against the Machine. Three original studio albums, while more than many bands, isn’t exactly a huge body of work. However, I’d think few would doubt their relevance or influence to rock in the 90′s and 00′s.
@Relentless_Beating: I don’t doubt Nirvana’s influence–that much is apparent both in terms of the ultimate popularity of grunge as well as their lasting influence on bands today. I guess what I’m interested in is “why” they’ve been so influential, which you touched on.
And so I ask, is it primarily that sincerity that makes Cobain appealing to so many? I certainly applaud that in an artist, and from what I know of his work in Nirvana, he certainly was genuine. But to me, it takes more than sincerity for an artist to be truly great. It may just come down to a matter of taste, but I’ve always thought Cobain’s vocals were typically pretty bland. There are exceptions, of course (“Territorial Pissings” comes to mind), but most of what I hear just bores me, to be honest. I don’t doubt or knock the guy’s honesty; but I feel like there were other bands who made music that just sounded better.
But, as toeballordjimmy already pointed out, it likely all just comes down to a matter of taste, and I simply may never get it.
I hated Nirvana for a long time and then one day something just clicked and I started to slowly start listening to them. Now they’re a favorite of mine. They have that same quality as The Melvins, just simple songs that rock.
@ecb41: Great post. I’ll try to answer as best I can without ranting on too long haha.
-
First off, yes music is always a matter of taste, I fully agree, and sometimes a polished recording can ruin the true sound behind someones vocals as well. What I would suggest to you maybe is listen to the full Unplugged album. In that album you can hear the true passion, emotion, and the real voice of Kurt Cobain. To me it’s actually a very haunting album, and maybe the most vulnerable he has ever been. If that makes sense.
-
Now as for the sincerity part, I truly believe that it was a major reason for Nirvana’s success. People didn’t feel like they were being fed something, which most people were at that time, with horrible hair bands like Poison, and the pop star music of Michael Jackson. People had finally found a real musician who they could relate too, and that’s why I believe Nirvana did what the did. I think smart people will relate to music with a genuine edge better then they will the cookie cutter stuff. It worked for band’s like The Beatles (Once they started writing their own stuff), Black Sabbath, Zeppelin, Johnny Cash, Pink Floyd. All musicians who made music from the heart.
-
Here is a song by Nirvana off the Unplugged album that I think will showcase what I mean about Cobain, and his true voice, and talent. I believe if this man was still alive, Nirvana would have surpassed alot more milestones, then they already did, and have. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcXYz0gtJeM
I’ve never been a Nirvana fan, although I concur with you guys. They opened a lot of doors and I really respect what they accopmlished in such a small span of time. Although, I gotta say this re-issue nonsense is corperate bullshit at it’s finest. I’m sure the surviving members could care less about this “collection”. In fact, I bet they actually disagree with it’s release.
P.S. – Them Crooked Vultures kill.
relentless makes the point. Nirvana is a band that was perhaps not the most unique thing in the world but what they did, how they did it, when they did it defines them. unless you were living in seattle in the early 90s you were inundated with bland hair metal if you wanted something that wasn’t pop music. ‘smells like teen spirit’ was simple, non-glossy, and less pretentious than anything we’d heard in years. the approach they had is still found in half the alternative and indie bands on the scene. i worship soundgarden but its nirvana that got me into that scene. and also, saying they only put out one good album is a fucking joke. ‘in utero’ is a fucking killer album. it sounds better than any of these digitally protool’d “albums” out there.
@revstevo: I agree, ‘In Utero’ was a stellar record, and in my opinion it was their best of their original material they recorded. I loved how unpolished it was.
“In Utero” is absolutely my favorite Nirvana album, and in my top 20 all-time. “Radio Friendly Unit Shifter”, is probably one of my favorite songs period. I’m not sure if it’s because of over-exposure of certain tracks on “Nevermind”, but I hate the hits, I turn off “Smells Like Teen Spirit” and “Come As You Are” whenever they come on the radio. Give me “Lounge Act” and “Territorial Pissings” instead anyday. “In Utero” is a album you can let play through, not a bad song in the bunch. I’ll definitely pick up the “Nevermind” reissue for sure, it has a special place in my heart. Like a lot of garage (basement in our case) bands with members my age (30), Nirvana was the first songs we learned how to play. I remember “Breed” being the first song we could play standing up, lol, memories…
« Back View All Recent Comments »