>raw as fuck, cheap sound
>some filler here and there
>abstract lyrics, pieces of poetry Kurt had written through his life
>high production and smooth sound, the least "Nirvana" album
>influential as fuck, 90's as fuck
>endless nameless is perfection
>Nirvana as fuck, noisy, their most punk album
>lyrics have a more direct message, but very little surprises
>the same fucking song structure overall
>very few highlights
stop hating Nevermind because it's popular, it's their best
no punk band should have nevermind's production, it sounds too polished and ruins the sound they were going for
stay away could be considered filler, as is on a plain for it's nonsense lyrics
>stay away could be considered filler
I used to not like that song, but the scream at the end and the bass sections make it enough of a song for me
>as is on a plain for it's nonsense lyrics
Bullshit reason to call a song filler
Your best argument seems to be that Bleach has childish lyrics, filler and cheap production.
Bleach's lyrics are no more or less childish than Nevermind. Both are made up of "abstract lyrics, pieces of poetry Kurt had written through his life".
The raw production of Bleach is half the charm and much better than the slick 90s (honestly even late 80s) sound of Nevermind. And filler? On Bleach? Where? There's nothing as dull as Stay Away on Bleach.
No, because when a production is too polished for the sound of the band - than it doesn't work.
I think this is why bands like dream theater fail time after time - their production is too clean, too polished and too childish for what they are trying to do.
BTW I'm not saying that on nevermind, just an explanation of how the situation you said could happen.
idk saying that production shouldn't be too polished, cause it doesn't fit the band, kinda reminds me of the shitty fake unpolished sound that some black metal artists use on purpose.
I mean cattle decapitation has proven that even a really polished deathgrind album can be 10/10