Posts artists that have a very diverse discography but still have a consistent discography with several great albums. I'm trusting your judgement here in not posting King Crimson or something like that, the diverse is the important part.
>pic related
...
What else would I post...
Is this a joke thread? Swans have huge weak spots in their discography and are one note as fuck.
They have at least 3 "eras" where they are playing completely different genres you dense fuck. They also have at least like 5 albums that are critically acclaimed and loved by most listeners. Kill yourself.
...
Nah man. Shits all the same. Entry level fag stuff. Listen to Kanye / get taste.
you are an idiot
your taste in music is probably terrible
are you trying to insinuate that king crimson's discography isn't diverse
Twenty One Pilots.
doors, death grips, daft punk, bowie
>swans
>diverse
You embryos get worse and worse.
What are you talking about? King Crimson's discography is massively diverse and very consistent.
King Crimson have a pretty diverse discography.
I'm trying to insinuate that wherever you look in the good part of King Crimson's discography, you're gonna hear progressive rock, sure their sounds might be diverse but it's all the same genre fundamentally. (I do love King Crimson though by the way, they're one of my favorite bands)
Yeah I am and yes it is.
meme
Would you care to lay out an argument as to how they're not?
He can't lay any arguments while he is using his advanced trolling tactics
Swans jumped from genre to genre and made great albums consistently for almost 30 years.
Sure, they had their bad moments(can't even remember the name of that one album that had a flower in the cover, but it was pretty shitty with the exception of one song) but all in all they are a pretty noteworthy chapter in modern music.
To Be Kind wasn't THAT bad.
...
>rock and folk wth varying degrees of loudness
>diverse
Embryos.
>I call people embryos on the internet
boy oh boy this boy likes swans boys
I can use far-fetched oversimplifications as well.It ain't that hard.
Is your shit taste in music really that fucking fragile? Just fucking contribute to the thread topic you fucking babies. Jesus Christ I know the Swans hate is bait but that doesn't make it any better.
Reddit memes
not an argument
>far-fetched oversimplifications
could you be more intellectually dishonest?
>this new
>intellectually dishonest
o shit, the boy can use big words. watch out everyone
Sparks and Bjork.
could you state your opinions instead of falling back to ad-hominem?Fortify your points dude.
>ad hominem
You're a walking meme. This pop-argument jargon is absolutely fucking excruciating. Develop a critical faculty. I don't engage with embryos.
Also, your only response is to posit a question; emblematic of clueless, obstinate adolescents. The fact you consider Swans a "diverse" group was telling enough.
Double posting?I guess you couldn't express your impudent thoughts with one post huh?
Also some pretty hot opinions right there la
:^)
Ulver
Aldean
Yo la Tengo
>I'm trying to insinuate that wherever you look in the good part of King Crimson's discography, you're gonna hear progressive rock, sure their sounds might be diverse but it's all the same genre fundamentally.
That's stupid. The only only reason a lot of King Crimson's discography is even considered progressive rock is because King Crimson in 1969 is a cornerstone of the genre. King Crimson from 1981 and onward just doesn't sound like progressive rock. And King Crimson from 1972-1974, while definitely being progressive rock, sounded unlike any progressive rock at the time or since then. King Crimson is very diverse, no matter how horribly your oversimplify the discography.