ITT:

Post albums that Sup Forums praises which you think are complete, utter pieces of shit.

Give me 4 (four) good reasons why you think Siamese Dream is a bad record.

OP is a special snowflake

>Whiny, obnoxious vocals
>Some of the worst lyrics ever put on a rock record
>overbearing melodrama and teenage angst, see the ridiculously cheesy string section on Disarm.

I can't think of anything else atm but that's more than enough to ruin it for me

All of them

...

>rating an album based on lyrics

GTFO and shit yourself

...

this, also any beatles album

mediocre, but not shit
also not praised on Sup Forums

...

An absolute borefest, i defy you to give only ONE reason to why is this good by any means

like there aren't one hundred "reddit" replies whenever someone posts it

emotional melodies and lo-fi

I dont like Mollusk

>emotional melodies
that doesn't make and album good
>lo-fi
same as above

Pretty songs

taste is subjective, assface

this was shit

this was just boring

this is okay

this was kinda good

I prefer Alien Lanes but even that isn't much of an upgrade

...

simple,bland and boring. no matter how many effects cover it up

>these 3 opinions all relating the fucking voice part only

Is that the only thing you pay attention to in an album you turbo pleb?

Wow thanks for your insightful contributions and deep thoughts in each of those albums. Really made me think.

Faggot

The effects are part of the album. They're not trying to cover up anything.

Shit taste mate

Literally kill yourself and save us from your shit fucking taste.

I never want to hear Jon Anderson's voice again as long as I live

came here to post that

tried listening to this on 4 separate occasions and fell asleep each time

...

I don't like it, i'd give 6/10 at most but to say that it's shit is just edgy.
How old are you?

These.

exactly

Lmao so you don't like the dude's voice? That's it? Also the lyrics are bomb for the most part and are delivered in a really heartfelt way. You're just a plen.

The songwriting is simple in order to bring forward the production/effects/details to the spotlight. Even then it's full of open tunnings and beautiful, memorable melodies, so even without effects it would sound great.

The production brings it to a whole new level. Listen to it in a good soundsystem and pay attention to the details.

Neat lyrics, pretty unique subject matter/aesthetic, good songwriting.

you probably are too poor to own a good audio system in which you can listen to this masterpiece

*spits*: the album

cant beat your post op.

I have to disagree, I highly doubt the album would be heralded at all today if it wasn't for the effects or producing.

Of course it wouldn't, no one said it would. I said that even without the production the songs would stand on their own as great pop tunes. Not on the same level of the full thing, of course.

yes because the standard for a "great" pop tune is so incredibly high

save yourself from a shitty taste mang it's not to late

People remarked that they didn't think anything new could be done with guitar music until Loveless came along, it was a breath of fresh air. Part of the reason it's so loved is that it is the first of its kind. Ofc if the album was made now people wouldn't love it nearly as much but context is everything.

That happens to be my favorite "grunge" era rock album. To each his own, I suppose.

...

>le whiny meme

Only one I agree.

I actually like that album and I still have to agree with that

I've heard much more hate than praise for this album here desu

This is an album I do like a lot but I understand the dislike for it

>People remarked that they didn't think anything new could be done with guitar music until Loveless came along

implying that loveless was the first shoegaze album pr that it was even the first to use distortion, reverb and feedback

I didn't imply that, that's just what was said about it at the time. Again, context is everything.
It obviously wasn't the first shoegaze album since Loveless wasn't even MBV's first album and shoegaze (+post-rock) were the last big advancements rock music has had.

Loveless blew everyone's dick off.

:^(

From what I know the actual recording of it wasn't that special, what you hear on the album is actually what his guitar, through all the effects, sounds like

The recording was insane, everything on that album but the drums, bass an vocals is guitars. Every tiny sound, every detail, all of it was processed guitar sounds. From just distortion + reverse reverb + tremolo bar strumming + open tunnings to keyboard triggered guitar noise samples. They took a whole week just to record a fucking tambourine that shows up for a few secs iirc. That's what makes Loveless huge, the attention to detail is astonishing.

Im not denying its popularity \
Im questioning its quality

The post above yours sums it up well.t.

Loveless wasn't even that popular. It nearly drove Creation to bankruptcy. It cost half a million dollars to record and it didn't sell that well.

Quality wise, see It's full of never heard before sounds, a dense, consistent, unique atmosphere and memorable tunes. It's accessible and deep at the same time. As far as rock music goes, it's one of its peaks.

>never hear before sounds
>everything except for the guitars were guitars

...

Hahahahaa understandable.

what singer would have been significantly better without throwing the whole feel off?

Death Grips complete discography

There was industrial hip hop before DG. Belly by Food For Animals is from like 2008 and sounds A LOT like DG. However, no industrial hip hop before them had the raw punk energy, unorthodox delivery, abstract lyrics and just insanely catchy hooks and diversity of DG. Niggas On the Moon still sounds like nothing else before it.

Also, there's plenty of appeal in the dystopian, cyberpunkish themes they talk about.

It would've been better as an instrumental album, though I don't like the sugery feel of the music either.

Type O in general or just that album?

hey deaf user