Why does it sound like if Corey Feldman was trying to make Art Angels?

why does it sound like if Corey Feldman was trying to make Art Angels?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=fmO0H0N9yXc
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

dude bro its super avant-garde and experimental you just dont get it

it sounds like diarrhea

bad thread

Yup.

may you explain why?

is it really so bad that it deserves art angels comparisons? might have to bump it down my priority listening list

it's not remotely similar to art angels, it's just that grimes guy trying to sneak another grimes thread onto the catalog
does kinda sound like if corey feldman could actually sing and had decent music taste, tho

>it's not remotely similar to art angels
how so?

>falling for le 'art angels is bad' meme
why would anyone do it?

all you have to do is actually listen to it and

I don't get this meme. Why does this board literally hate Art Angels, while praises No Now?

wouldn't surprise me, but I haven't listened to the OP pic album so I can't confirm obviously

so are they similar or not I mean c'mon

I don't get the Art Angels hate, its a decent 6/10 album, but whats even more confusing is comparing it to No Now

Not even remotely similar aside from both artists being white

...

visions shits on it

Because Art Angels is style over substance garbage, whereas Clarence actually knows how to write good song. His melodic sense is so much better

They are similar, tgey approach the same sonical territory, the only difference is that Art Angels wasn't in Fantano's top10 list, and it's not made by a person who was meme'd before.

it's made*

Just because you dislike one more than another doesn't mean they are much different.

Art Angels literally sounds like Grimes ripping off mid-00s Avril Lavigne pop punk

I'd rather listen to mid-00s Avril Lavigne pop punk than Art Angels because at least it's not masquerading as some hamfisted attempt at "intellectual pop" when it's really just stale and brainless

>Art Angels literally sounds like Grimes ripping off mid-00s Avril Lavigne pop punk
The only reason you can't say that about Clarence is because he has a male voice.

They don't even sound the same though
I know this is just weak bait on your part but still

how doesn't they? they literally play in the same genres. check your ears

The fact that I like Clarence far more is irrelevant, as he is simply a much better songwriter, producer, and even vocalist than Grimes

>bait

how is he?

Art Angels is irrelevant. Clarence is the underrated GOAT pop genius of our era

That's what your regular Fantano-drone believes.

but they sound the same except the vocals
hypocrisy much?

>The fact that I like Clarence far more is irrelevant, I just simply like him more
huh?

For starters, all the songs on No Now, save for the brief instrumentals, is really nuanced production-wise and sung passionately. For being just pop songs at their core, they hold up better on repeated listens than anything on Art Angels.

Yeah, well, it's a shame I don't care about his opinions in the slightest.

>hypocrisy much?
obviously yes

Halfaxa is Grime's best album and honestly if you think anything else you probably got bullied in school

>art angels is not nuanced production-wise and not sung passionately
idk what to say about it, it's just not true
just because it's popular on here to hate something doesn't mean you have to follow it, or at least don't be this deluded, it's just hilarious
and it's coming from the person who likes No Now more than grimes

they sound nothing alike you fucking retard

Art Angels is actually quite nuanced, you probably just listened to it thinking about the forced memes

what a waste of trips

how don't they?

Art Angels pushes infinitely less boundaries than No Now. Art Angels lacks No Now's bizarre lyricism, strange textures, maximalist production, etc. No Now is a grimy perversion of 00s pop, while Art Angels is only a slightly updated homage to it.

No, the fact is you are unable to explain how Grimes is any better, when it's simply a mediocre release from an artist who can do much better.

This

What forced memes?

>No, the fact is you are unable to explain how Grimes is any better, when it's simply a mediocre release from an artist who can do much better.

can you read?
i'm not talking about how she's better
i'm talking about how they are similar at some point
read again:

>Art Angels lacks No Now's bizarre lyricism, strange textures, maximalist production
>No Now is a grimy perversion of 00s pop, while Art Angels is only a slightly updated homage to it.
literally none of it is true

>Art Angels pushes infinitely less boundaries than No Now
what boundaries No Now is pushing, except that sound collage track in the middle of the pop album?

>tfw blown away when i listened to the first time
>tfw the more i listened the more i realized that the songwriting is actually awful and formulaic to make place for all the glitch and noise shit going on
>tfw can't listen to it anymore because i realized it's just not good

No Now is the definition of a novelty album i think

Well, to me it should be pretty apparent that if one is better or worse than the other, then of course they're not going to be so similar overall. The albums share some similar elements, yes, but the execution is a whole other story.

>Well, to me it should be pretty apparent that if one is better or worse than the other, then of course they're not going to be so similar overall
i wasn't talking about their similarities quality-wise, though i like them both, they just sound similar in some ways and not really as different as you want it to be

>I don't care about his opinions in the slightest
of course you don't

this album is trash
how did it turn into such a meme?

it was a meme from the beginning

this track alone is better than anything grimes has put out thus far

youtube.com/watch?v=fmO0H0N9yXc

man am i the only one who still really likes this album?

sounds like angelic 2 the core

yep
Grimes is just shit, there's no two ways about it

>Grimes is just shit
why?

No offense, user, but if you seriously think this is great music then I wouldn't go around trumpeting your tastes too much.
I mean, it's got a lot of cool sounds to it, but that's pretty much it in terms of content. There's no form, no flow. No apparent INTENTION behind what you're hearing other than to just sound cool - just a bunch of cool sounds someone decided to slap together (which is about as far from the most positive aspects of Grimes' music as you can get.)

I've never listened to Clarence Clarity before, but if this song is representative then I'm inclined to agree with this user here

he didn't say it was great though, just that it was better than any of grimes releases, so basically above a 5/10

Made me chuckle

>just that it was better than any of grimes releases
Yeah, I know what he said. The problem with that opinion is that having a strong sense of intention behind any form of art automatically elevates it - in terms of subjective quality - above those of its peers that happen to noticeably lack the same. In all art, underlying intention is key to quality because that is what motivates people to love/hate it. You can love/hate Grimes' music because there tends to be something to it that compels a love/hate reaction.

There doesn't really seem to be anything worth reacting to about this song which doesn't just boil down to your initial reaction to what it sounded like - which categorically makes it inferior to the vast majority of Grimes' music.

>if you seriously think this is great music then I wouldn't go around trumpeting your tastes too much.

lmao god you sound like such an asshole

you have no fucking clue what you're talking about

I'm espousing a strongly held opinion on art and music on a music discussion board - of course I'm an asshole (at least I'm honest about it.)

I actually do. If anything, I know too much about it.

holy fuck, what are you even like in person

OK, well there is very clearly form, flow and intention so actually, no, you're a fucking clod

I'm a classically trained professional musician of high enough caliber that I routinely get recruited for other people's international touring engagements. Does that answer your question?

making something sound the way it does because it sounds cool is perfectly fine as an intention, though. besides you're only listening to it for the first time, so that's a strong assumption for you

nah man, fuck off. don't you have a bassoon to be playing or something?

>at least I'm honest
This meme is worse than saying "at least I was just joking/ironic" as self-justification.

I love Clarence's work, but Vapid Feels are Vapid is, well, a pretty vapid song. Don't get me wrong: I love it, but compared to everything else he's ever done it pales in comparison.

I wholeheartedly agree that intention can be the difference between art being wallpaper or not. That's why I love No Now, because you can tell that Clarence slaved over the whole album to make it drum tight. Clarence intermingles a handful of lyrical themes throughout the album - religion, cults, cancer, drugs, heartbreak, metaphysics, the nature of fear and self loathing - and he revisits them over and over so they begin to contextualize themselves within the universe of the album, ie cancer is always used as a metaphor for love (sexual, romantic, and religious), religious figures are used as a shorthand to refer to existential dread, etc.

Musically, there's a lot of interplay between songs, wherein Clarence will sample himself to create a link between songs that fit together thematically, and portions of the more 'climactic' songs are sprinkled throughout the album to create buildup and emphasis.

Also, there's a lot to be said between the juxtaposition of melodramatic boy R&B vocals over sleazy EDM-esque beats and noise collage experimentation, but that's a different post entirely.

What I'm saying is that you should listen to No Now to judge for yourself. You can call CC gaudy or overproduced or whatever, but one thing you cannot call him is unintentional. The album is extremely thought out - he's said that he wanted to release an album so all-encompassing that he'd be happy if he never released anything again - and it uses language and instrumentation in a way that is very, very rare. Aside from all that, the album is full of bangers and I recommend it to anyone who is a fan of pop structure experimentation.

>form
What form does it follow?

>flow
how does it flow? To my ear it seems to begin and end pretty much in the same place and barely variates during the interum, aurally speaking.

>making something sound the way it does because it sounds cool is perfectly fine as an intention, though.
Only if the artist doesn't mind people getting bored with it very quickly, because that is what focusing all your creative efforts on the surface features of art does in the end (again, see the wise words of this user here )

Btw if you think that the song linked to here ISN'T very representative of the rest of this artist's work, please do speak up about it (could be that this song just happens to be a fluke.) Like I said, this is the first time I've come across Clarence Clarity before.

>Being trapped in the sort of mindset that assumes EVERYTHING seen/read on the internet is a meme

Me again.

Cool. Might have to check it out now.

Hope you like it man. No Now is pretty stuffed but I think every moment is great, so feel free to skip around.

Clarence Clarity is fucking terrible.

no i love it too. it amazes me people are too pleb to appreciate it.