I agree. I haven't liked a Green Day record since Dookie. I really like their first three records, but after that totally lost interest. I think what really killed it for me was how the radio, as usually, played the hell out of a few songs. When I heard they were doing a 'rock opera' on their latest album, I had to give it a chance. I was pleasantly surprised at how good it was. I mean come on, you have what used to be a 2-minute punk band cranking out 9 minute songs? Crazy... My personal favorite is Jesus of Suburbia. Definitely a record that requires several listenings. I think it's a nice cross between solid Green Day tunes and Pink Floyd's The Wall.

Indeed, I'm lucky enough to catch them for a huge summer festival in Seattle; they're one of the headliners. Couldn't believe they were hitting the road again. GREAT NEWS!

Come on, everyone has their influences! I have never, nor would I, claim that Nirvana was the first to define the genre. No one's arguing that. Of course I wouldn't make this argument if I didn't enjoy their music as much as I do. Maybe it's just me, but what you & your buddies listen to and think may not be a balanced view nor does it probably reflect the overall opinion of their music. I'm not saying you have to like these guys or think they're the best thing to come out of the 90s, but at some level you have to agree these guys made a big dent in the history of music. I say this because I believe it as do a large amount of other people. And not just random people that I know, but critics - and more importantly - people/peers in the industry. For example, The Rolling Stones are a group that I'm not particularly fond of. I'm not sure why; I'm just not blown away by them. However, they paved the way for an uncountable number of bands, as well as an entire generation and genre. It would be completely out of line for me to write them off as an 'overrated' band, soley because of me and/or my friends own personal feelings. As you pointed out, I don't hear people talking about how they're constantly spinning up Rolling Stones discs, but that has nothing to do with how great they were and what impact they had. All I'm trying to say is that if you weren't particularly moved by their music, great, that's your opinion and good for you for having one. But it's stubborn to question the impact they had on the music industry. I also don't think his suicide is what sustains their legacy. There's plenty of people in the 27 club whos music way over shadows how they died. Likewise, there are a substantial amount of people who have killed themselves and it did nothing additional to sustain/promote their music. I dig your opinion about their music, nothing new there, but trying to ignore or sidestep the accomplishments of the group is uninsightful. I don't doubt that you may be knowledgable in music, but being able to say what's good/bad/overrated/etc goes much more beyond personal opinion.

I'd also recommend Sigma acoustic guitars. These are made by CF Martin, which arguably have made (and still make) some of the best acoutic guitars. I'd compare it to Gibson/Epiphone or Fender/Squire. I've had a nice Sigma acoustic, outfitted with electronics, for 6 years now and it's a great guitar. Sounds awesome. Definitly great bang for the buck. I think a lot of them retail for $300-$400+, but if you catch a sale or check-out eBay, you'd probably be able to grab one for $200. PJL

I can only hope that you say this out of ignorance... Regardless of how anyone feels about the group - musically or otherwise - they inarguably opened the flood gates for punk rock/indie/alternative music into the mainstream. Come on, take a look at the Top 40 stuff in 1990-91; we're talking about Color Me Badd, Paula Abdul, Extreme, etc. If nothing else, these guys got people fired up about music again. They signaled the end of one era and the beginning of another. If that wasn't enough these guys carved out a legacy in ~4 years, which is something that most groups strive to do over an entire career, most with little success. I guess I rate bands by three main factors: 1) How influential they were/are 2) Do people still listen to then many years later? 3) How respected are they by their peers? Imitation is the highest form of flattery... There are only a handful of groups that truly satisfy this criteria and I think Nirvana can be/is one of them. Many people consider Kurt Cobain to have been one of the last 'real rock stars'. I don't entirely know what the hell that means, but man it sounds cool. The thing with Nirvana is that I still hear them on the radio, with decent frequency, given that these tunes are over 10 years old - and the kicker is that it doesn't sound that dated. A better analysis will be to see how they hold up at the 15-20+ year marks. Rolling Stone just released an 'Immortals' issue, summing up who they consider to be the fifty greatest artists of all-time. Did Nirvana make the list? Yes. Did they crack the top 25 of all-time? No. I don't really feel that this web site is a great place to discuss music at all, but since someone threw it out, I figured I'd at least give my 2 cents as well. And come on... give credit where credit it due. PJL

Try checking out the System.Collections.BitArray class; it provides a pretty decent way of looking at/manipulating integers at the bit-level. I've used it a few times for win32 and mp3 stuff. Also, if you only want to check the presence/abscence of a particular bit, use the '&' bitwise operator. I've found it's extremely worthwhile to truly understand the bit-level operators, especially if you're doing those type of operations frequently.