This album is overrated and honestly not that good desu. It's boring. Same 3 chords over and over

this album is overrated and honestly not that good desu. It's boring. Same 3 chords over and over.

Other urls found in this thread:

gloriousnoise.com/2008/transience_and_transcendence_1
youtube.com/watch?v=gtm6gR58l_E
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

same

you're the same 3 chords over and over?

babby's first critique

it's actually four chords.

also fuck you

if this is a confessions thread...

Imho Kanye West's only good album is the college dropout, everything that follows is not as good.

...

Please don't. Let's not make it a fucking confessions thread

I've listened to TLOP more than any other Kanye release and I'm not sure why.

No you dont understand you have to listen to this album exactly 100 and 1 times to understand the true genius behind it. To understand it you have had to be in 1998 America and simultaneously in nazi Germany otherwise you will never get the full picture of how great this album is. You need to listen very closely to it at exactly 4:20AM at Yosemite national park under the big cliff at exactly the spot marked with a big red "X" to understand the unspeakable greatness before it. You also need 1000$ headphones with at least $2000 amplifier to understand it in all its lo-fi greatness.

All in all it's 11/10 record second only to MBDTF and Old Boots New Dirt.

TLDR: it's shit and aged like milk

How is its simplicity a reasonable critique? Music is about the emotions elicited, not whether the guitarist can lay down a 12 minute solo.

It's the greatest album of all time. Prove me wrong.

It's t-too late.

That's a little much. It's not Pet Sounds.

Pet Sounds, Marquee Moon, In the Aereoplane over the Sea. That's it for me my man.

It's an album hipsters crow about loving then go back to listening to Katy Perry or Sia.

>implying Yeezus isn't the greatest album of all time

please kill yourself

You have the burden of proof, not me. I don't make outlandish claims that an album of '90s lo-fi emo folk about Anne Frank is greater than White Light/White Heat, In the Court of A Crimson King, the whole body of krautrock, Daydream Nation, Loveless, and so on.

>Pet Sounds
SMiLE, Sgt. Pepper's, Song Cycle, Forever Changes, and Odessey And Oracle?
>Marquee Moon
Buy Contortions, Pink Flag, Radio Ethiopia, Blank Generation, Double Nickels?
>In the Aeroplane Over the Sea
Black Foliage Animation, Circulatory System, Tone Soul Evolution?

White Light/White Heat is uninspired and mediocre as hell compared to TVU&N. The latter is John Cale's masterpiece along with his trilogy of Nico albums, while WL/WH is a childish piece of mediocrity filled with gimmicky songs like Sister Ray and The Gift.

ITAOTS is one of the most inspired albums I've ever heard. I pity anyone who doesn't find refuge in the sincerity in Mangum's songs, all of which came straight from the heart. I've even cried listening to the album on occasion, though I really have to be in a specific mood for it to have that much power over me. It's infinitely more important than WL/WH to me, and I find it a more than respectable choice for the greatest of all time, although it certainly isn't my own.

You need to stop reading Scaruffi and form your own opinions on music.

But muh lyrics

Why would you attempt to counter my claim by posting some of the most overrated albums of the 20th century?

What's the point of this post?

What is this?

But this album uses over 17 chords, user.

No one has attempted to counter your outlandish claim yet, as you haven't presented any proof for it, so it's empty and not based on anything. Again, you have the burden of proof, not me.

> I've ever heard
> I've even cried
> over me
> It's infinitely more important than WL/WH to me

You, your, to you. In other words, it's your subjective. There's no point in arguing with subjective claims.

> You need to stop reading Scaruffi and form your own opinions on music.

We're talking about the most memed album on Sup Forums, and you're saying my opinion has been formed by others. Sounds about right.

I couldn't be so agreeing

>the quality of an album can be judged by any objective criteria
mediocre meme my friend

I cringe every time people on this board try to act superior by criticizing popular albums.
Like they have no other achievements in their life so the only thing they can do to feel any kind of superiority is pretending that they have a better 'taste in music' when in reality that is the stupidest shit you can say.
Taste in music is literally the most opinionated thing you can have, and these people are so fucking pathetic they have to pretend in their heads that somehow after all their failures their continued parasitic existence is somehow justified by their obscure opinion.

/pasta

This.

>as you haven't presented any proof for it,
You seem to be under the misapprehension that an album's quality can be judged by its influence (which is very wide in the case of ITAOTS) or its musical innovation, but for normal human beings it's about the emotions the album was able to elicit in its listeners, and as much as it might have left you cold, there are large percentage of ITAOTS fans who were moved to tears by the ablum

I know that the simplicity in music doesn't mean low quality and sometimes the complexity can damage the music...

But i have problems to get into the album too, i just need to somebody that can describe it with precision, why he likes the sounds, what emotions feel with every song, what represents in overall the album, and in what has of new this album, if you do it i will be very grateful with you.

Looking at the trip, I think arguing with you is pointless.

But just for the record, an album can be judged by its innovativeness, and it's pretty objective. E.g. the first album of synthesizer sounds is objectively the first one to do so. In terms of pure sound innovation, there's not much to say about ITAOTS, if anything at all.

gloriousnoise.com/2008/transience_and_transcendence_1

As pointed out, whether quality and innovation are synonymous depends entirely on the listener and what he values

It's not argument that many listeners liked this album and were moved to tears by it:

—Many people cried over Mufasa's death in Lion King. It doesn't make it objectively best movie of all time.

—Many fans cried listening to boy band songs. It doesn't make them objectively the best music of all time.

> for normal human beings it's about the emotions

You seem to assume that your romantic morals give you a high ground in an argument and make my point invalid. This makes your arguments irrational and thus makes your arguments pointless. Present some more objective arguments, then we can continue. Otherwise, I see no point in refuting claims based on appeal to emotion.

I sincerely love this album and don't feel the need to defend it desu

>As pointed out, whether quality and innovation are synonymous depends entirely on the listener and what he values
I agree with this 100%.

Meanwhile, the claim in question was: "[ITAOTS is] the greatest album of all time". If it was "ITAOTS is my favorite album of all time", I wouldn't be in this thread. But the author of the reply claimed that the album is objectively the best one ever made, and presented no objective evidence for it.

I cannot argue with someone liking this album and hold nothing to say about it whatsoever. It is not my business who likes what. But if there's an argument about objective values, then it needs objective arguments, not claims appealing to emotion. That's all I was saying.

I still enjoy it

>objective arguments
>music
This is incredibly silly. The entire purpose of music is so appeal to our emotional faculties. Otherwise it's a pointless intellectual exercise that has no affect on the real world; an anthropological and philosophical exercise. Again, you can make arguments about the importance of a particular artist, but you can't point to that artist and say that he makes music that is "good" by the same criteria that most people judge "good" by.

>"[ITAOTS is] the greatest album of all time". If it was "ITAOTS is my favorite album of all time", I wouldn't be in this thread.
That's a distinction with very little difference. It's just how people speak. We don't feel the need to qualify everything we say with "in my opinion," especially when discussing a medium that's inherently subjective.

youtube.com/watch?v=gtm6gR58l_E

RUUUBY TROUOUBELS THEY SEEM TO FOLLAOW ME AS FAR I CN ASE E EYE MUST BE MY DESTNY TRUBLE THEY FALLO C U IN TO FCRADLE IN THE GROUND THEY WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!!! OOOOOH LALLLLALALALAL OOOOOOOOOOOOOH LALAL LALAL ALALA LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RUUUUBY OH BABB:Y CANT U SEE IM SO :( IT KILLI NME U LISTNEN RUUUBY IF YOU LIKE @ THINK OUT LOUD IT MIGHT RLLY HELP ME OUT U LISTNEIN GILLLL TTROOUBLE THEY SEEM TO FOLLOW ME

"ITAOTS is my favorite album of all time. Prove me wrong" makes no sense. It's an absurd statement like "Sup Forums, what's the best album of all time and why it is ITAOTS?". It cannot be taken seriously.

So I assumed the author actually talked about objective values in music, like innovation, use of musical theory, quality of recording, etc.

If you insist that music if his claim was subjective, then my response was pointless in the first place, and this whole argument is pretty pointless. This is, basically, you and the other posters trying to "argue" with me that ITAOTS is your favorite album, which is absurd. It is subjective and cannot be argued for obvious reasons. You might as well ask me what you're thinking right now. I don't know and can't know.

And I disagree that music is subjective. It is absolutely not, because some aspects of music are based on natural phenomena, or at least on phenomena perceived equally by virtually all humans.

this

...

THEEEEYRE SENDING ME A PICTURE OF THE MOOOOOON

It's Sup Forums speak my friend. Someone makes a bold, sometimes controversial remark and ends it with "prove me wrong." Surprised you haven't seen it before.

>And I disagree that music is subjective.
Technique is objective, but how people perceive some music in comparison to objectively more technically accomplished music is entirely subjective. No one can say that Bob Dylan is an amazing musician, but people don't listen to him for his virtuosity.

Same, I think I'm trying to trick myself into thinking its good

The major scale is based on natural phenomena, and it's structure is in compliance with Euclidian algorithm (or Bjorklund algorithm, more specifically).

Many laws of musical theory are defined by mathematical values. Quality of the melodies can, with enough analysis, be reduced to following the body of musical theory while introducing original patterns.

Innovation in music is, as I said, objective.

In what sense does appealing to emotional faculties serve a more legitimate purpose than appealing to the intellect?

>It's Sup Forums speak my friend. Someone makes a bold, sometimes controversial remark and ends it with "prove me wrong." Surprised you haven't seen it before.

This was your message: . I assumed you were talking about ITAOTS. If you were arguing about music in general, see .

You missed the entire point of my post. The study of aesthetics and how it relates to human perception is an intellectual deconstruction of something that's very reliant on culture, personal experience, and various other subjective criteria. Explaining to someone why a piece that adheres to certain standards of innovation and quality is "good" isn't going to make them garner more personal meaning from the music.

>Pet Sounds
>Greatest Album of All Time

Maybe if every single song didn't end exactly the same

Music is a Dionysian art. Always has been.

see

greatest album of all time.

My belief is that with enough deconstruction we can reduce a lot (but not all) of "Dionysian" aspects of art to Apollonian ones "in disguise", so to say.

For musical content, it is not as hard. I mentioned some of the ways "aesthetics" can be described a complex set of rules defined by natural laws and human perception.

For lyrical content, a literary analysis will do the same job. Ultimately lyrics can be reduced to key topics, author's philosophical position on them, then other aspects like compliance with the theory of poetry, and, finally, the emotional remainder, which can be rather small in comparison and can be reduced even further by employing philosophical/psychological analysis to distill the objective and subjective.

I make these statements because this parallel can be made with other mediums, for example painting and design. What may appear to "just look cool" is in reality a complex set of traits perceived as one.

i want to play the king of carrot flowers pt. 1 on the guitar but i cannot play a goddamn f chord fuck me

(i've never played guitar in my life)

Play a G (optionally move your two bottom fingers to the C position while you play the G to get the proper sound) then D then C and it sound pretty good and is much easier. Play around with a capo as well.

The thing is, even when you understand the technical aspects of a particular medium, enjoyment can rely on psychological and cultural phenomena that don't directly pertain to any objective measurement of aesthetics, and even personal experiences like seeing the band live with a girl you liked, or remembering your high school days and how much you listened this music can affect your perception of it. And even if that extra baggage can't be used to judge the music objectively, that subjective enjoyment is as real as the intellectual pleasure derived from deconstruction could ever be.

>For lyrical content, a literary analysis will do the same job
Literary analyses are built off faulty axioms and simplistic assumptions. It's far less objective than musical analysis.

>beep boop i'm a robot. let me program lyrics for your next album

You liked that one but not Late Registration?

Pretty much what Aphex Twin has tried already. Read up on Euclidian rhythms and rhythm analysis if you're interested. A lot of world rhythms such as samba follow strict mathematical patterns.

Also, remember that Beethoven went deaf at the end of his life and still managed to write his 9th symphony.

thanks friend :) I actually can't play Bb well either so I think I just should give up on anything that requires barre chords until I don't suck

That's music, not lyrical content

Show me a better album that's written with only 3 chords OP.

Hey I've been playing for 7 years in total and barre chords are still pretty difficult to transition between smoothly, so don't get too discouraged.
And the chords I gave you luckily don't need Bb so there

I agree with this, but what you named is really completely subjective. Imagine yourself a list of favorite albums written by some individual:

" #1. Record A, because it played when my son was born

#2. Record B, that's what I lost my virginity to

#3. Record C—it's a very sad song for me because it played when my dog died…"

It sounds exactly like a Facebook post someone could write. The problem with this kind of writing is that it hinders all discussion/communication, restrains it to those who are "in". Everyone else will simply not understand it

Thus, in my opinion, it ultimately doesn't belong on a message board. It creates an impenetrable echo chamber of completely subjective opinions. Everyone else will be simply put off by this kind of "discussion".

Ultimately, to some degree subjective opinions will be present in any statement; but reducing subjective to possible minimum is, IMO, a necessary condition for coherent discussion, and a matter of ethics.

I would submit that it's literally impossible to divorce yourself from those subjective criteria. Even when I attempt to judge something on more objective grounds, when I'm completely honest with myself I realize that i'm using those arguments to justify subjective enjoyment, and that other albums that might be more more objectively innovative don't get similar praise from me simply because they mean less to me.

Also, the vast majority of the posters on this board aren't musically educated. So asking for them to stop giving their subjective opinions regarding music is basically to everyone posting to stop.

>emo
>folk
Maybe when you understand the adjectives used to describe sounds then you can continue to a music discussion.

sincerity doesn't make good music you fucking memer

and for the record, all 3 of those albums are shit

Is store just not a worthwhile endeavor in your opinion?

> I would submit that it's literally impossible to divorce yourself from those subjective criteria. Even when I attempt to judge something on more objective grounds, when I'm completely honest with myself I realize that i'm using those arguments to justify subjective enjoyment, and that other albums that might be more more objectively innovative don't get similar praise from me simply because they mean less to me.

It is completely true, and that's exactly why I come to Sup Forums. Namely, to compare my opinion to others' opinion, and realize where it reflects objective values and where I'm being subjective.

And that's exactly why I try to stay objective. It might be tempting to engage in holy wars to me at times, but ultimately, I understand that it is useless and, ultimately, harmful for the conversation.

>Also, the vast majority of the posters on this board aren't musically educated. So asking for them to stop giving their subjective opinions regarding music is basically to everyone posting to stop.

The debate should only be encouraged. It's ultimately beneficial as it helps to find objective truth. There's definitely going to be some degree of subjective in it, and it is a given, obviously.

What I'm against is turning a discussion board into everybody's personal blog, a propaganda platform for subjective views—in other words, a place where people they completely subjective, shut in their own minds and refusing to listen to others. I'm against it because there are already places like YouTube comments, and Sup Forums has at the very least some degree of discussion.

It is of course a given that many people on this board are not educated in musical theory, history of music, and so on. But I think it's obvious that it is a desirable quality for improving discussion of music and should only be encouraged. Ultimately, as I said, no one is infallible in a subject not fully understood like music; but we should try to keep the discussion as objective as we can.

Fuck off

THIS