Is this right?

Is this right?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=0HTajp3sGww
youtube.com/watch?v=HGbvCZFrTks
youtube.com/watch?v=YN4BncLvXic
youtube.com/watch?v=Y1jkUJ4IMUM
youtube.com/watch?v=t65Li7hLDpI
youtube.com/watch?v=RqypczTds80
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

It's just prog rock. That second LP is straight up Magma rip off music with out the shlock.

kys
yes, nice trips

Aesthethica is Post Metal meets Minimalism; The Ark Work is Post Metal meets Electronica

Mr Bungle is the most Avant Garde of all of them

LMFAOOOOO

High quality b8

is that what you do when you see something you disagree with? automatically write it off as b8? does this help you sleep better at night?

everything on that chart sucks

Liturgy is garbage it sounds like it was recorded by a middle schooler using fruity loops

CHIPOTLE

Is avant garde just another word of eggspork?

Enjoy your midi trumpets with retarded vocals

enjoy your generic growls over generic drum beats over generic guitar playing you doritos eating neckbeard

go listen to moonsorrow and vektroid lite-metal for hot topic shoppers. you've yet to realize that liturgy is an art exhibit, these "midi horns and retarded vocals" are intentional and you obviously missed the entire point of liturgy and their music

It's actually correct.

Nothing on the right side qualifies as avant-garde strictly speaking. These bands don't have a manifesto, they don't have a program, they don't purposefully try to overcome the current state of their scene, they don't claim to be historically relevant, they don't base themselves on a clear theory of art and culture, they don't have a very distinct philosophical background and they don't aim to create a new movement all by themselves or to alter society as a whole.

Liturgy does all that.
And it fucking sucks.

Avant-gardes are often very stupid and produce a lot of shit.

So, OP is entirely right, none of the band on the right should be called "avant-garde", whereas Liturgy has every right to be called "avant-garde".

However this has no bearing on the actual quality of each album, and the fact that you automatically interpret avant-garde as a compliment means that your worldview is all fucked up.

Obviously Liturgy is avant-garde.
But that doesn't mean that it's any good.

>and the fact that you automatically interpret avant-garde as a compliment
[citation needed]

>generic
god forbid musicians actually try to create art within the framework of a given genre instead of mashing things that do NOT go together, resulting in an extremely underwhelming "art exhibit".
>these "midi horns and retarded vocals" are intentional and you obviously missed the entire point of liturgy and their music
You did.
Liturgy was never supposed to sound stupid or ridiculous, it was always hyped by HHH as a grandiose, beautiful and magnificent thing that elevates all sorts of contemporary musical movements. But it's goofy as fuck, in spite of his best efforts.

you really missed the boat on liturgy user, they are all descendants of arthur honegger. they are not just a bunch of hipster teens that are trying their hand at black metal, they're more intelligent than everyone else that has ever tried to make black metal music

>god forbid musicians actually try to create art within the framework of a given genre
nothing wrong with this but if you start sounding too much like your predecessors (95% of modern metal) then you are not worthy of anyones time except for teenagers who are not familiar with the people you're ripping off

...

>nothing wrong with this but if you start sounding too much like your predecessors (95% of modern metal) then you are not worthy of anyones time except for teenagers who are not familiar with the people you're ripping off
That's 100% wrong.
If I love Anthrax, why shouldn't I also like a band that rips them off? Why wouldn't they be worthy of my time if they sound the same?
Doing a good imitation is just as laudable as having novelty appeal.

liturgy saved trap and metal

>Why wouldn't they be worthy of my time if they sound the same?
>Doing a good imitation is just as laudable as having novelty appeal.
1000% wrong

>they are not just a bunch of hipster teens that are trying their hand at black metal, they're more intelligent than everyone else that has ever tried to make black metal music
You're partially right: HHH isn't your average hipster, if he were, then he would at least have enough self-deprecativeness and humor to not take his project so deadly seriously. He's intelligent in the most basic an neutral sense of the term: he knows a lot of things and can organize them in complex ways.
But he has zero common sense and very little insight into the musical cultures he's dealing with.

The other dudes however are just in it because they like playing music that has complicated rhythms.

>different=good
>newer=better
absolutely wrong

>>different=good
>>newer=better
i didnt make these implications. i'm merely stating that if something is new in the sense that it is original then it is "better" than something that is generic but just as "good"

originality, when done well, trumps copy cats. and if you disagree then you are wrong

>there are people who unironically like Liturdgy

youtube.com/watch?v=0HTajp3sGww

nobody calls any of those albums on the left avant-garde

>If I love Anthrax, why shouldn't I also like a band that rips them off? Why wouldn't they be worthy of my time if they sound the same?
>Doing a good imitation is just as laudable as having novelty appeal.
holy crap that is a terrible way of thinking about art. if everyone had that same mindset, then we would still be painting antelopes on caves. progression is one of the most important aspects of art. as for enjoying a rip-off as much as the original, how can you think that way? historical context should be something that you factor into account. anthrax was making somewhat groundbreaking music in the 80's but someone ripping them off today have no artistic merit whatsoever

yes they do

this is a goat cover

Reminder that Liturgy is just playing mediocre entry level black metal over generic entry level electronic music

>mediocre entry level black metal
>generic entry lever electronic music
go to bed, HBM

honestly better than the original

They are though
If you think they are interesting you just fell for the meme

why are plebs like you contributing to avant garde threads?

stay the fuck away cuck

the melodic and harmonic devices that liturgy use are far from those of traditional black metal. half of their progressions are in a major key. the use of extreme motivic repetition is very unique, and the drumming is on a whole new level.

you're very wrong

>pleb
>cuck
Nice buzzwords, opinion discarded

>in major key
Done in the past
>repetition
Done in the past
>drumming
Ive heard so much better in metal alone

on taw they employ some advance sound manipulation techniques

music theory is jew shit, liturgy straight up DO NOT SLAY

>Ive heard so much better in metal alone
no you don't

>Popular music
>avant garde

pick one

Can you prove it though

avant-garde is more of an historical category than a stylistic one

Liturgy is certainly part of the avant-garde of popular music because it is a frontrunner in the trend of dumb midcult hipsters trying to flesh out the "deep, artistic" elements of a music style that has always been purposely stupid and lowbrow

So advanced that it is considered trap influenced ?

>historical context should be something that you factor into account.
Only insofar as it carries novelty appeal for YOU.
Anthrax are NOT good because they were groundbreaking at some point in history, they're good because they have RIFFS, and that shit transcends history.

And let's not forget that "art" is a category that's only relevant to historians. As a human being (or as an artist) you should approach all entertainment as just what it is regardless of its historical context.

enjoy being trapped in a cultural void with music that's too stupid (formally and conceptually) for people who know what they're talking about, and too pretentious for people who enjoy metal for the reason it was created in the first place

>>in major key
>Done in the past
yeah but certainly not in most "entry level" black metal

>>repetition
>Done in the past
i'm talking about motivic repetition and motivic development, where they take a small musical phrase or motif and repeat it over and over while sometimes mutating it slightly and gradually over extended periods of time. this is definitely not something that is done in black metal. hhh pretty much said he took the idea from shellac. listen to these songs
youtube.com/watch?v=HGbvCZFrTks
youtube.com/watch?v=YN4BncLvXic
listen to 3:27 in this song
youtube.com/watch?v=Y1jkUJ4IMUM
and the first 40 seconds of this song
youtube.com/watch?v=t65Li7hLDpI

now listen to 2:07 and onwards in this song
youtube.com/watch?v=RqypczTds80
or pretty much any part of any other song on that album. you'll hear what i'm talking about. it's a very unique technique to incorporate into "black metal"

>Ive heard so much better in metal alone
whatever, you can't deny that it's extremely virtuosic drumming

all you're saying now is that this stuff has been done before, but you're totally backpedaling on your original argument that it's "just entry-level black metal"

>He's intelligent in the most basic an neutral sense of the term: he knows a lot of things and can organize them in complex ways.
everything I've ever read from him has been an incoherent mishmash of jargon that he seems to use without having any idea what it means. He writes like a pretentious autist with Dunning-Kruger syndrome, not like an intellectual

the value of originality in art is a myth based on the equally mythical notion that artworks are autonomous beings.

You can subscribe to it but you have no right to call me "wrong" because I don't.

>"art" is a category that's only relevant to historians. As a human being (or as an artist) you should approach all entertainment as just what it is regardless of its historical context.
>entertainment
sorry i actually appreciate art and you only listen to music for shallow entertainment purposes. you sound like one of the kids who listens to brostep for the sick drop

I think his writings are very coherent.
But it's very clear that he doesn't understand all the terms he uses.

sorry i actually appreciate art
*listens to Liturgy*

You're a historian. You admire artworks for their theoretical significance within your field of study.
Which is not the same thing as enjoying artworks, which I do.

Listening to brostep for its historical significance (and I'm not saying that it doesn't have any) is even more ridiculous than listening to it for the sick bass drops.

but context is an enormous part of enjoying artworks if you're thinking of them from even a slightly critical perspective. you can't seriously tell me that you don't appreciate intricate classical sculptures like David, because today the same thing could be printed out using a 3d printer. that's just being ignorant

enjoy not getting liturgy for the rest of your life plen

i wasn't saying that i listened to it for either reason. brostep sucks for obvious reasons

>the value of originality in art is a myth
im willing to pay money to see you defend this

Again, you're merging two separate activities under the vague term "appreciate".
I can enjoy a 3D-printed David as much as the real thing, but I certainly admire the original one a lot more.

I'm more than fully equipped to appreciate Liturgy's music since I'm older than 16 and have read a book

I would rather spend time listening to something that is actually mentally stimulating or more immediately satisfying

absolute garbage opinions mate

prove it by explaining what the point of the ark work is

>liturgy straight up DO NOT SLAY
>they're good because they have RIFFS
there's no point in arguing with boneheaded metalfags

if you want to have an "interpretation contest" then congratulations, you win. I would feel pretty embarrassed trying to paraphrase the fatuous bullshit he writes in his albums' bandcamp descriptions

feel free to post your own explanation, because it would probably give me a good laugh

so you're saying you admire originality more, but you can enjoy rip-offs the same as the original. that basically just boils down to you prioritizing your own personal "enjoyment" of art, over appreciating art from a critical standpoint.

if that's the case, then you have no right to be critiquing music. i understand that you don't personally like liturgy, but you're in no place to deny its artistic merit

The Ark Work has several "points" but one of them that's easy to identify is that it's supposed to be "total" and to prolong Wagner's project (explained in The Art Work of the Future) which itself is heavily based on Goethe's notion of art works as self-contained organic autonomous entities that only obey to their own intrinsic formation principle, as if they were living beings. Wagner merges that idea with pseudo-buddhist and nationalist ideals according to which a total work of art is supposed to express and cement the will of a people and keep it healthy and pure.
More or less.
I'm sure that HHH knows about all of this background, since he states that his project is meant to have a messianic impact on culture and life as a whole, and to cure the extreme metal listeners of their fascination for death.

but here's a big fucking problem: his music is the very opposite of an organic, coherent whole. It's an awkward amalgamation of very different musical currents that obeys not to an inherent life force, but to the theoretical goals set beforehand by HHH. He admitted that he spent several months tweaking and adjusting each track of The Ark Work to reflect his ideals and that a lot of his inspiration came in the form of "what if I put that in there?" which makes his music contrived as fuck.

I guess you could say that it expresses the spirit of the hipster people, but since it's a spirit of inauthenticity and intellectual posturing, there's no health and vigor to find in it.

He's certainly technically proficient, ambitious and does new things. But since these ambitions are all twisted and fail to result in anything enjoyable (let's not forget that he tries to make inspiring and beautiful music) then I can at least say that his artistic merit is limited by the goofiness of his music.

Damn I never picked up on that Shellac influence. I guess that explains why he chose to cover that song.

liturgy is great

>his music is the very opposite of an organic
how so?

Threads like this are why everyone hates Sup Forums

posts like this is why Sup Forums hates you

not sure what you mean by that

agree, plus Aesthetica is overrated

>overrated
it is not a highly regarded album anyway user

Fair enough

fucking retard

Quality discussion

why would i care about the quality of discussion with people who don't understand the meaning of the words they use

You have no idea what post-metal is

>tfw HHH actually knows what he's doing but you can't make heads or tails of it

prove him wrong

Liturgy is just straight garbage, and the only avant garde stuff on the other side is Gorguts, Mr. Bungle, Ved Buens Ende, and mauldin of the well. The rest is just prog and Sunbather is post-metal

when you turn 18 you will realize how wrong you are

In what way are Obscura,Written in Watters, and Bath pseudo avant-garde metal? Like I know it's bait and all but I'm sure there's actually someone dumb enough to think like that

Reminder that Liturgy are fucking shite

Quality discussion

Yes.

don't think I've ever seen anyone class Blackwater Park, Sunbather, or Terminal Redux as "Avant-Garde Metal"

read the rest of the fucking sentence

Tremolo picked post rock with trap influenced beets vs. Fucking gorguts and mr bungle
I bet you dont like cynic or death either

Nothing about any of those artists is avant-garde.

Ved Buens Ende and Mr. Bungle are the closest things to avant-garde in that image, everything else is shitty prog-metal or shitty post-metal

being post-something is a concept that's only understandable within the context of historical avant-gardism.

wrong

Well said.

Perhaps their intention is to be avant-garde. Trouble is that nothing in their music actually breaks new ground.

No particular element does, but their combination in this specific manner is definitely something new.

everyone ITT is fucking braindead

rude

come on, man, have you even listened obscura? for fuck's sake

Hi Hunter. Great moves. Keep it up!