Because, you know, posting a bunch of links to POLLS by various music magazine/websites that have huge biases is totally a legit way to prove why Kurt Cobain is a greater guitarist than anyone, right?

You're having a hard time separating Cobain the musician, which would be the songwriter, vocalist and guitarist, from Cobain the guitarist. I think you'd meet a whole lot less resistance if you were to post arguments like this in the greatest musician list, because your arguments are in many ways irrelevant and invalid from a guitarist point of view.

Legendary status: As already pointed out, Cobain didn't destroy music before him. He was part of a movement, which he popularized and which didn't have anything specifically to do with his guitartone, that ushered a new style of music to the mainstream, but the others posted many a referance to bands that persisted and Pantera themselves did nothing but gain popularity through grunge's haydays. Therefore, Cobain the musicians wins, but Dimebag the guitarist wins.

Influence: What you're saying just is not right. Even if you were to judge rock guitar history by the mainstream only, Cobain is at best an extension of influence from earlier punk and heavy metal. Fun facts from bands you post are influenced by Cobain (and bare in mind that you're just talking about pure influence here, you're in no way even trying to point to guitar specific influence, which I've already shown that Dimebag is chalk full of); Green Day themselves claim to be influenced by early punk and alternative rock bands who are closely connected to punk (Hüsker Dü etc.). So what you're claiming to be Cobain influence is in reality influence from the same artists that Cobain is influenced from. Blink 182 are influenced by the skate punk movement, being bands like Pennywise and NOFX. These bands are in turn influenced by early punk, which is the same source that Cobain draws influence from. Blur was part of a movement that was anti-punk,so how you claim Cobain's influence there, I don't know.

"Damon Albarn of Britpop band Blur agreed with interviewer John Harris' assertion that Blur was an "anti-grunge band," and said, "Well, that's good. If punk was about getting rid of hippies, then I'm getting rid of grunge."

Originality: I'd like you to point out what exactly is original about his tone, cause I don't see it. All I hear is a guitar plugged into an amp with a above average amount of fuzz. Dimebag, on the other hand, has a VERY distinctive sound, especially from Far Beyond Driven and The Great Southern Trendkill. I've yet to hear someone play with as much gain as him without the tone and chords becoming complete mush and it made everything sound very heavy. If you try to play songs from Far Beyond Driven, you'll be surprised to find out that he actually plays in E (or 1/4 below E, which is his quirky standard tuning. Think he got the idea from Def Leppard, but I don't know where it originated). At least I was surprised, cause the tone is immense and sounds like it would be D at the least ("Shedding Skin" or "Strength Beyond Strength" is what I'd want you to listen to for this). Also, you say that his solos are highly recognizable.. Well.. if I played the exact melody to one of the most popular songs of the last 20 years in my solo, I'm guessing I'd make it highly recognizable aswell. Doesn't have a lot to do with tone, but more with how popular Nirvana are. Also, I can't remember any other solos he has. Thought they were pretty few and wide apart, and when he first did them, they were more along the lines of small lead runs (that's what I'd say the SLTS "solo" is) than actual full fledged solos.

This is just one part of the equation, because originality as a criteria isn't all about guitar sound. What about originality in terms of riffs and solos? Cobain rode on top of an already established movement and made it popular. In terms of techniques used, chords progressions or whatever, Cobain didn't display a whole lot of originality. It's the same ol' same ol', and that is of course perfectly fine, but it's not orginial. Dime had original use of harmonics and whammy bar use, as already pointed out and instead of riding the way, he, together with Pantera, were part of the creation of the sub-genre of metal called groove. You could say Exhorder are the originals and I could agree partially, but the sound they had on the demos to Slaughter in the Vatican weren't as developed or distinctly different from earlier sounds as CFH.

Creativity: This isn't just the songwriting department, but songwriting sure plays in. You say SLTS and "Bloom" have creative solos, so I challenge you to point out the creative aspects. I can't remember "Bloom" off the top of my head, but solo in STLS just is not creative. He plays the melody to the main verse vocal line on the guitar. You are aware that this has been done before? Quite a few times. Well, I already made a case for Dimebag's creativity in my other post so I don't feel like repeating myself in large parts. Oh, and since you like lists and mainstream recognition so much, Dimebag had three solos in Guitar World's list of 100 greatest solos, while Cobain had one. Also have a look at how many guitar magazine covers Dimebag has prided in comparison to Cobain. Not that it matters, cause you can't directly connect those sorts of references to the criteria.

I don´t have any problem separating anything. The problem on this forum is that most of you can´t accept that Cobain´s guitar style is legit and really close to the classics. I have presented examples of the guitar songs that helped to shape the world of rock guitar and in all of those cases the guitar styles of those guitarists (Wray, Richards, Lennon, Hendrix, Townshend, Davis, etc.) are similar to Cobain´s.

I have accepted that the so call “shredders” guitar style is also great and legit. Why can you do the same about Cobain?

No. I have presented external sources that agree with me. Why don´t you present some sources that agrees with you?

To say that his guitar tone have nothing to do with the Grunge movement is pure ignorance. The grunge movement started with SLTS. As mentioned before (and backed up by external sources), that song is a as important as any other great guitar song (Purple Haze, Satisfaction, Day Tripper, etc).

Here we go again. Living in denial.

Song #2 (the signature song of Blur) is 100% influenced by Cobain´s guitar. Fuck, even FS has agreed with me on that.

Just listen to it. Even the tone is really similar.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlAHZURxRjY[/youtube]

it's "living in" not "leaving on"

Thanks.

I´m at work so I´ll continue latter.

Please don't.

I don't see anything remotely unique to Cobain's style in that clip.
Nor do I find anything remotely unique to Cobain's style in Cobain's playing.

What about this one?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asOvnGHwtDU[/youtube]

As in the main list, creativity is the songwriting department.

For this list, to create a great melody on a guitar is a sign of greatness. To play the melody as a solo is also acceptable and considered classic rock guitar playing. These are 2 of my favorite solos that makes just that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ8jH5jHRhc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELu094t17m8


In Bloom is #65 at Guitar World’s Solos List.
http://guitar.about.com/library/bl100greatestf.htm

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhRwkC6RxcU[/youtube]

You have a problem, that's for sure.



We can't accept it because it's not true.



His style being 'close to the classics' counts against him, if anything.



Because his style is not 'great' and 'legit'.

And even if those both are true, Song 2 is not Blur's signature song. It's an aberration. They wrote that song to make fun of American music and in particular the late grunge/early post-grunge artists. They believed you could write a nonsense song with a catchy guitar riff and it would become popular in America.