Albums that are insane

I’ve been wanting to listen to music that is completely insane. Like it sounds like it was made by lunatics or crazy people. Pic related is example of type of music I’m lookin for

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Y1Psx24n3rM
m.youtube.com/watch?v=BgrbYWjR3Yg
youtube.com/watch?v=t8x9nVXQuTw
youtube.com/watch?v=E4b0-juTiQ8
youtube.com/watch?v=-xh6hECCots&list=PLKGoM31VRluPyOT7IHRYxm1ktofr4YnXW
youtube.com/watch?v=QKmyeH0nA6Q
youtube.com/watch?v=O2K_uQ_rnmw
youtu.be/Dp3BlFZWJNA
youtu.be/br5tyuEUBWE
youtu.be/JtIZmk_rBDM
youtube.com/watch?v=czsU5raXy6k
youtube.com/watch?v=znCiUtDibuk
youtube.com/watch?v=jgRESp8aLO0
youtube.com/watch?v=OYyW6EJSHf4
inflooenz.com/?artist=can&submit=Search
youtube.com/watch?v=qmA7nzR20rU
youtube.com/watch?v=D1yRQmwrIVA
youtube.com/watch?v=HCxodRXo74c
youtube.com/watch?v=meLFGntVkB4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

youtube.com/watch?v=Y1Psx24n3rM

...

Lightning Bolt. Especially the vocals. Here's a sample.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=BgrbYWjR3Yg

Listened to like a minute of it and it’s the type of shit I’m craving. Thanks user

youtube.com/watch?v=t8x9nVXQuTw

Can were heavily influenced by Stockhausen, and you see this best in the second disc of Tago Mago

also early Kraftwerk

youtube.com/watch?v=E4b0-juTiQ8

AAAAAH AAAAH AAAAH UUUGH UUUUGH SKREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

...

it's because of damo's vocals. Japanese always sound insane. Maybe they are.

Mooney's vocals sounded insane, too, but in a different way

youtube.com/watch?v=-xh6hECCots&list=PLKGoM31VRluPyOT7IHRYxm1ktofr4YnXW

...

this heat

...

that is very off-putting

youtube.com/watch?v=QKmyeH0nA6Q
the japanese are just nuts

Listen to Rudimentary Peni, their lead singer/guitarist suffered from schizophrenia. Their third album was written during his stay in a psychiatric hospital while he suffered from the delusion that he was the reincarnation of Pope Adrian IV.

Oh, should note, the album posted is the second one (Cacophony), which is a concept album about the work and life of H. P. Lovecraft.

youtube.com/watch?v=O2K_uQ_rnmw

Why don't you fuckers listen to more than one album in their discog?.. Oh that's right right, their not "cool" on Sup Forums yet!

Actually we listen to 3 albums in their discography thank you very much!

...

no japanese man no fun

...

Pere Ubu

>Can
>insane
AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH thanks for the laugh, nannon. I am drunk and not exactly happy but I appreciate the humor. Hold up, I got you though:

youtu.be/Dp3BlFZWJNA
youtu.be/br5tyuEUBWE (what you're probs REALLY looking for)
youtu.be/JtIZmk_rBDM

peking o is way more insane than threnody

>literal noise pop
GTFO

That album doesn't sound crazy at all really, though I do like it
OP would probably like Monster Movie and Delay though

Vega was nuts. This one is even more ridiculous.

...

No it's not. Peking O is like a very tame version of something like what Manfred Schoof was doing back then. Melodically, that stuff is far more tame than Threnody. Forget the "lock crazy guys in room then record their vocals" aspect of Stalaagh which was my second link.
Don't tell me to gtfo for posting noise pop, tell that to OP since he posted Tago Mago.

this album is batshit insane
>german depressive black metal
>avant garde
>harmonica

>piece thoughtfully composed to evoke the horrors of the nuclear attack on hiroshima using extended techniques and tone clusters in a very deliberate fashion
vs
>japanese guy shouting jibberish over free improv

i think you're confusing "insane" sounding music with "le avant garde

...

They were literally his students

Tago Mago is about as easy-listening as it gets

>i think you're confusing "insane" sounding music with "le avant garde

white house

Why hasn't anyone brought up TMR?

its really cartoony and brown, but not """insane"""

Keiji Haino - Watashi Dake
Scott Walker - Bish Bosch
Richard Dawson - Nothing Important
Koenjihyakkei - Nivraym

Nothing really insane about it. Like, if you take the fact that the way the parts are arranged is kinda weird, the keys are standard blues stuff, the melodies/harmony are also as a result standard blues stuff. It's just how everything else comes together that's a bit off, but it's far from the only record that does stuff like this. Like good luck listening to Ornette Coleman's later stuff that's far more chaotic than this.

Boredoms

>Can only exists either for people to go "look how whacky and crazy they are!" or "look how cool the grooves are" not knowing that when it comes to a songwriting perspective theres far more creative options
What a dumb thing to say

>piece thoughtfully composed to evoke the horrors of the nuclear attack on hiroshima
the dedication to hiroshima actually came after the composition was premiered

Sure, if you're fucking new around here or still dickride Can. If you legit think the jams on the first half of Tago Mago are better than more creative and interesting options like jazz guys or even jammy rock stuff liek Grateful Dead;s live stuff, Xhol Caravan, or early Amon Duul II, you're delusional cuz Can's repetitive and they couldn't into developing their jams into more interesting directions with varied technique. Then there's the second half of Tago Mago (the so called "weird" tracks) which is literally ripped from Manfred Schoof's idea of crazy free jazz drumming but nowhere near as interesting because it's far more straightforward without the nuance in dynamics or variety in percussion timbre affecting the work.

The entire idea of Can's music is an attempt to incorporate the ethos of classical minimalism within a rock music framework, while also taking influence from jazz and eastern music, so criticising them for being "repetitive" doesn't really make sense. Also, the only track on the second half which resembles Schoof's music is "Peking O", and even then only the second half. "Aumgn" is a clear homage to Stockhausen's work (which, FYI, he praised without knowing at the time he was listening to his own students), and "Bring Me Coffee or Tea" is more in line with the psychedelic, minimalist jams that appear on the first half of the album.

I feel like it's also worth mentioning that before joining Can Jaki Liebezeit was a member of Schoof's quintet, so saying they "ripped off" his style is pretty dumb as well.

>so criticising them for being "repetitive" doesn't really make sense
It does if you actually know what makes minimalism. It does mean repeating the exact same shit with no real variation. That just makes the music boring and it's what idiots think of when it comes to minimalism.
>Also, the only track on the second half which resembles Schoof's music is "Peking O"
What? Aumgn also had the crazy drum parts, too. Again, they just weren't on the level of what Schoof did with European Echoes right before Tago Mago was a thing. Sure there's some of that Stockhausen influence in there with the mild electronic bits, but he crazy drums take over the works.

>I feel like it's also worth mentioning that before joining Can Jaki Liebezeit was a member of Schoof's quintet, so saying they "ripped off" his style is pretty dumb as well.
That doesn't change the fact that what was done on Tago Mago is very simple compared to what was done on European Echoes for example. Jaki was worse at doing that crazy free jazz style drumming, he didn't have the groove of actual funk drummers, and he didn't vary his drumming like how later electronic drumming did. He just wasn't good at any particular point, but he did enough stuff to where entry level music listeners can more easily enjoy his stuff.

...

youtube.com/watch?v=czsU5raXy6k

Unironically the best Strokes album

>It does mean repeating the exact same shit with no real variation.
Just popping in to say I hope you meant to say "doesn't" because the entire point of minimalism is using subtle variation to create larger structural variations.

Yeah that's what I meant. Tago is a fucking embarrassment of what minimalism is truly capable of. But people veer towards Tago the way some faggot just out of high school will veer towards a goth chick not realizing how shitty of a relationship that would be.

>It does if you actually know what makes minimalism. It does mean repeating the exact same shit with no real variation.
Can's music clearly does have variation. Please don't be wilfully dense.

>What? Aumgn also had the crazy drum parts, too. Again, they just weren't on the level of what Schoof did with European Echoes right before Tago Mago was a thing. Sure there's some of that Stockhausen influence in there with the mild electronic bits, but he crazy drums take over the works.
This is blatantly untrue. The Stockhausen influence is far more pervasive; the "crazy drums" only occur for ~5 minutes of the total 18 minute duration of the piece. Granted, that does constitute the climax of the piece, but still.

>he didn't have the groove of actual funk drummers
Elaborate on this?
>and he didn't vary his drumming like how later electronic drumming did
Transcribe his drumming on "Mushroom" and tell me how it lacks variation.

You keep making vague value statements saying that Can's music was less "creative" and "interesting" than minimalist music and Schoof's work, but don't seem able to actually back these claims up using appropriate musical terminology, nor explain why the disparity is so great as to make Can's music not worth listening to at all.

youtube.com/watch?v=znCiUtDibuk

Frankly surprised no one's suggested this yet.

I would say that Halleluwah in particular uses the general concept of "lengthy, repetitive piece of music" but sells it on energy alone rather than exploring the same psycho-acoustic pattern development of Reich, Riley, etc. I quite like the energy anyway, though I would agree that I wish it had a bit more of that psycho-acoustic "oomf".
What would you say is the best use of minimalist techniques in krautrock?

>Can's music clearly does have variation. Please don't be wilfully dense.
Sure, but it's so minuscule compared to even their contemporaries like Xhol or ADII, forget actual minimalism like the works of Feldman or Reich, it's not even worth listening to.
>The Stockhausen influence is far more pervasive
If you've actually listened to Gesang or Kontakte the two pieces that supposedly influence that stuff, you would realize that there's far more tape fuckery and electronics in general happening compared to how boring the Can stuff is. Like you gotta be legit delusional if you compared what Can's doing there to Stockhausen especially when Stockhausen's criticized far more sophisticated stuff.
>Elaborate on this?
When the other parts besides the bass rarely wants to work with you, that's kinda what happens. Maybe worth actually composing or playing an instrument to fully get this.
>Transcribe his drumming on "Mushroom" and tell me how it lacks variation.
Mushroom's basic as fuck wtf are you on? Most good drumming from death metal, jazz, indian classical, and african folk music would throw that out of mind in terms of great rhythmic patterns percussion wise.
> "creative"
>"interesting"
You say it's vague, but to me it's obvious. I make those statements with the assumption that the other has listened to this stuff. It only becomes obvious that the work of someone like Schoof is capable of creating something far more creative using a wider variety of dynamics and timbre when it comes to similar stuff, but I feel I shouldn't have to explain this to you if you claim to be so knowledgeable.

Neu! !

youtube.com/watch?v=jgRESp8aLO0

I'm high as fuck,. this thread is amazing

It's been a long ass time since I've last heard their music. I suppose it's time for a relisten

>but sells it on energy alone
If it was on the level of energy of something even like say....Immigrant Song by Zeppelin, this would be viable. But it objectively isn;t.
>rather than exploring the same psycho-acoustic pattern development of Reich, Riley, etc.
I agree, but then you gotta make it up in the ways modern electronic music often does with loud, variable, viscerable, ever changing grooves.
>What would you say is the best use of minimalist techniques in krautrock?
Neu! using it to set up what would be huge for modern day groove based electronic music.
Amon Duul II who use to it have far more things happening at the same time than most rock music including other krautrock. If they count, Boredoms or quite a bit of noise rock/shoegaze that got itself inspired from Krautrock has a tiny tinge of that Reich way of repetition but with more standard rock stuff happening.

>Boredoms or quite a bit of noise rock/shoegaze that got itself inspired from Krautrock has a tiny tinge of that Reich way of repetition but with more standard rock stuff happening.
Sounds interesting, I'll give them a whirl

Check out their album Vision Creation Newsun if you have never given them a listen before and strictly want something closer to krautrock. Their older stuff tends to veer closer to punk rock with more diverse timbres.

>Every artist/band I don't like tried to become a classical composer, but failed: The post
You could've said it earlier. It's not like something inane like that is a first on this board.

>You could've said it earlier. It's not like something inane like that is a first on this board.
Not at all. I literally mentioned other genres of music in the fourth bit of my own response because I recognize what western art music can and can't offer. None of that is offered by what Can does. There's far better music to listen to if I want whacky experimental stuff. There's far better music to listen to if I want grooves I can dance to. There's far better stuff if I want sheer visceral fury. There's far better stuff if I want complex cerebral yet engaging musical experiences. Not a damn thing Can's actually good at.

>Sure, but it's so minuscule compared to even their contemporaries like Xhol or ADII, forget actual minimalism like the works of Feldman or Reich, it's not even worth listening to.
Again, please elaborate and back up your claims.
>If you've actually listened to Gesang or Kontakte the two pieces that supposedly influence that stuff, you would realize that there's far more tape fuckery and electronics in general happening compared to how boring the Can stuff is. Like you gotta be legit delusional if you compared what Can's doing there to Stockhausen especially when Stockhausen's criticized far more sophisticated stuff.
Like I said earlier, Stockhausen himself praised "Aumgn". If you think you know better than him, feel free to prove it.
>When the other parts besides the bass rarely wants to work with you, that's kinda what happens. Maybe worth actually composing or playing an instrument to fully get this.
Still an extremely vague statement. Also I play multiple instruments and I'm trained in composition so this weak attempt at condescension isn't going to work.
>Mushroom's basic as fuck wtf are you on?
Transcribe it then and prove it.
>You say it's vague, but to me it's obvious. I make those statements with the assumption that the other has listened to this stuff. It only becomes obvious that the work of someone like Schoof is capable of creating something far more creative using a wider variety of dynamics and timbre when it comes to similar stuff, but I feel I shouldn't have to explain this to you if you claim to be so knowledgeable.
Lol, when did I "claim to be so knowledgeable"? Sorry your meaningless value statements don't constitute axioms of truth. If you're claiming one of the most influential and respected bands of the past 100 years isn't worth listening to, the burden of proof is on you.

>Can's music clearly does have variation. Please don't be wilfully dense.
So does ambient trance, doesn't make ambient trance "minimalist"

You've repeated almost everything again. That being said, your writing seems oddly familiar. Could you be the same person arguing about post punk failing to become classical music as well? Those were the days.

>Transcribe it then and prove it.
The drumming on Mushroom does not build in a minimalist fashion. It contains several different rhythms, but they move linearly from one to the next in even measures.

Not sure what point you're trying to make here.

try to understand why the songs sound the way they do and the trackorder that's pitfall after pitfall and you'll find anger that borders on insanity here.

>Again, please elaborate and back up your claims.
Read the full post.
>Like I said earlier, Stockhausen himself praised "Aumgn". If you think you know better than him, feel free to prove it.
I don't know better him, but he knows better than himself. Read his post comparing newer electronic artists of the 90s, note his criticisms, and note how much more they account for the works of Can because Can didn't have the ability to mess with timbre the way the 90s guys did. People grow up tastes wise, Stocky included.
>Still an extremely vague statement. Also I play multiple instruments and I'm trained in composition so this weak attempt at condescension isn't going to work.
Then you should be able to note how little the guys in Can know when it comes to playing guitar, how little the band members understand when it comes to motivic development, and the rest of the stuff I have mentioned. But no, you just took your basic high school theory class where you learned the most basic common practice rules, and you know how play a tiny bit of a couple instruments, so you think you know what's up.
>Transcribe it then and prove it.
That's something you ask me to do, not necessarily something that changes whether or not it's basic or not. Don't expect me to be as naive as a trip like JTG. Also it's ridiculous you would ask me to transcribe something that repeats it's drums almost exactly the same for the vast majority of the track.
> If you're claiming one of the most influential and respected bands of the past 100 years isn't worth listening to, the burden of proof is on you.
They are nowhere near as influential as you claim, and if they really were they would not only be far more respected, but also Jaki maybe would've even gotten a sticky when he died. Oh, but that didn't happen because most peeps here and on other music sites don't actually care about Can, Can's just musical "cool" currency so you can show off to your friends.

Not sure what you're talking about. Still not a "no u". I brought up my points, and if someone else is just gonna say "oh you're just doing 'no u'", that's disingenuous to what I post and what that term really means.

This hasn't been posted yet?

>I don't know better him, but he knows better than himself. Read his post comparing newer electronic artists of the 90s, note his criticisms, and note how much more they account for the works of Can because Can didn't have the ability to mess with timbre the way the 90s guys did. People grow up tastes wise, Stocky included.
By this logic he should hold 90s electronic music in higher esteem than his own music composed in the 60s and 70s. Fucking moronic point.
>Then you should be able to note how little the guys in Can know when it comes to playing guitar, how little the band members understand when it comes to motivic development, and the rest of the stuff I have mentioned
Then you should be able to back these claims up. Seriously, look up "burden of proof". Also, Can's music is based more in improvisation and development of mood and texture.
>But no, you just took your basic high school theory class where you learned the most basic common practice rules, and you know how play a tiny bit of a couple instruments, so you think you know what's up.
More attempts at condescension. Yawn.
>That's something you ask me to do, not necessarily something that changes whether or not it's basic or not.
Transcribing it would demonstrate how basic it is, brainlet.
>They are nowhere near as influential as you claim
You really love baseless claims, don't you?

Rest of the post is more insults and projection. You're worthless.

Maybe I'm just a pussy, but Lou was definitely in a bad place when he made this.

>By this logic he should hold 90s electronic music in higher esteem than his own music composed in the 60s and 70s. Fucking moronic point.
Not at all. Perhaps you should actually fucking read the article to see the point I am trying to make.
>Then you should be able to back these claims up. Seriously, look up "burden of proof". Also, Can's music is based more in improvisation and development of mood and texture.
That's great, and I brought up improvisation rock bands that do far more in terms of development of mood and texture than Can ever has in their whole career (Xhol and ADII)
>More attempts at condescension. Yawn.
No, more attempts at expectation from you. I respect you, that's why I try not to treat you like an idiot where I gotta explain everything.
>Transcribing it would demonstrate how basic it is, brainlet.
Sure, but that's again something you asked of me, if that is what makes you want to change your mind, you set the rules. It's more a game than some sort of discussion at that point. You might be a newfag, but I learned from JTG transcribing aspects of The Epic, and that is that autists like you will never give up even if shit's transcribed. Not to mention with a track like Mushroom any retard can recognize how simple that rhythm pattern is.
>You really love baseless claims, don't you?
Not really. You haven't given a single example of how they are actually influential. Ambient? Klaus Schulze/Popol Vuh/Tangerine Dream/Brian Eno beat them to it. Funky dance? Funk/Disco/Kraftwerk/New Wave beat them to it.

youtube.com/watch?v=OYyW6EJSHf4
and all the other releases

>Not at all. Perhaps you should actually fucking read the article to see the point I am trying to make.
I've read it. Nowhere does he amend his original appraisal of "Aumgn". Your argument makes no sense.
>That's great, and I brought up improvisation rock bands that do far more in terms of development of mood and texture than Can ever has in their whole career (Xhol and ADII)
And failed to explain how they do more using appropriate musical terminology.
>Not to mention with a track like Mushroom any retard can recognize how simple that rhythm pattern is.
Your original assertion was that it lacked variation. Try not to backpedal.
>Not really. You haven't given a single example of how they are actually influential. Ambient? Klaus Schulze/Popol Vuh/Tangerine Dream/Brian Eno beat them to it. Funky dance? Funk/Disco/Kraftwerk/New Wave beat them to it.
What is this supposed to prove? Just to alleviate your autism, here's a list of bands Can influenced:
Einstürzende Neubauten, Material, New Order, Pere Ubu, Peter Gabriel, Suicide, Talk Talk, The Fall, Cabaret Voltaire, Chrome, Coil, Eurythmics, Iggy Pop, Japan, Killing Joke, Mogwai, Moonshake, Nurse with Wound, Psychic TV, Public Image Ltd., Radiohead, Spacemen 3, Swell Maps, The Cure, Throbbing Gristle, Tortoise, Wire, A.R. Kane, Add N to (X), Alternative TV, Chumbawamba, Clinic, D.A.F., David Sylvian, Electrelane, Fennesz, Loop, Magazine, Pavement, Sonic Youth, Spectrum, Stereolab, Th' Faith Healers, The Beta Band, 'O'Rang, Buzzcocks, Caribou, Cul de Sac, Disappears, Farmers Manual, Flying Saucer Attack, Ghost, Jon Spencer, McCarthy, Mouse on Mars, Mushroom, Simple Minds, The Cars, The Fiery Furnaces, The Orb, Thin White Rope, Toe 2000, Trans Am, Ui, Windy & Carl, Paperhaus, Tame Impala and World's End Press

...

Can is a good band and their best album is Future Days

>I've read it. Nowhere does he amend his original appraisal of "Aumgn". Your argument makes no sense.
It only doesn't make sense if you don't read what he's talking about. The same criticisms he makes of the 90s guys about simplicity and repetition and lack of development can be applied far more to Aumgn particularly from an objective perspective because of how little the track changes. Stocky's a fan of shit changing, Can's shit barely changes.
>And failed to explain how they do more using appropriate musical terminology.
This shouldn't need to be explained if you have actually listened to the stuff. Like, if the concept of individual technique and the variety in that on an instrument to instrument basis goes over your head, perhaps you shouldn't be having this conversation.
>Your original assertion was that it lacked variation. Try not to backpedal.
I am not backpedaling. Believe it or not, having a simple rhythm pattern and lacking variation both often tend to go along a lot in pop music like...Can for example.
>Einstürzende Neubauten
Far more influenced by musique concrete
>Material
Far more of a jazz funk feel there
>New Order
Kraftwerk obviously was the major one here, maybe Suicide as well
>Pere Ubu
I didn't know Can was a garage rock band!
>Peter Gabriel
Not gonna recognize literally him bringing in KC musicians instead of Can?
>Suicide
They were doing what they did before Can even did Tago Mago
>Talk Talk
More jazz fusion/new age influenced
>The Fall
Yeah maybe this is a good case, but then The Fall is ass, too
>CV
Musique concrete mainly, too
>Chrome
Way too jammy in their early career to be Can influenced. Probs more so Xhol, ADII, Guru Guru, etc.
>Coil
they were early industrial influenced, which is more musique concrete influenced
>Eurythmics
Disco, new wave, FAR more than Can lmao
>Iggy Pop
I am starting to think that you think Can's the only krautrock band out there.
>Japan
Putting new wave to Can is very disingenuous cuz kraftwerk/Moroder

Ignore him, he literally just copied that list from
inflooenz.com/?artist=can&submit=Search
He's either autistic or a troll and has no idea what he's talking about

Yeah, that's why I stopped at a certain point instead of going through the whole thing. It's fucking crazy how far Can austists go to defend the band.

You gotta admit they're pretty good tho
Listening to Landed rn, it's ok

I feel you, brotha. Can't go wrong with Landed or Flow Motion. So ahead of their time ya know what I mean?

Holy shit you are legitimately fucking retarded.
1. The criticisms Stockhausen applied to the 90s music he discussed in that article, he never applied directly to "Aumgn". If you think those criticisms also apply to "Aumgn", you should be able to prove it. Simply stating with no proof that Stockhausen would've changed his mind and retracted his previous appraisal is a fucking weak point.
2. Again, simply stating something as if it's a fact and saying "you should know this" does not constitute a legitimate argument. I advise you read a little about the concept of burden of proof.
3. Believe it or not, two things "tend to go along a lot" does not mean they are mutually inclusive.
4. Those bands, AFAIK, specifically named Can as an influence. Claiming that doesn't count because other bands or genres influenced them more, or because they made a different genre of music to Can does not somehow negate that influence. I really don't know how you could even think this was a valid point.

Actually I copied it from Allmusic. How does this alter my point in any way?

>Actually I copied it from Allmusic. How does this alter my point in any way?
Because it's not an authoritative source of musical influences, at best it's something slapped together by some rando, at worst it's the collated average of various LastFM scrobblers based on some arbitrary statistical average. You namedrop a massive list of artists as if you're knowledgeable when in fact you probably haven't listened to even a quarter of them.

If you actually bother to research I'm sure you'll find that all those bands have named Can as an influence in some interview or another.

This.

You literally will not. If you knew anything you'd know AllMusic is a garbage source. They claim that Iron Maiden cites the Sex Pistols as an influence, for example, when the former is on record despising the latter.

>he never applied directly to "Aumgn"
That doesn't mean they can't be applied to Aumgn
>you should be able to prove it. Simply stating with no proof that Stockhausen would've changed his mind and retracted his previous appraisal is a fucking weak point.
Like, I have mentioned Aumgn's note choices and structure already. If you're asking for more, then you're just being disingenuous for the sake of winning an internet argument, which wouldn't change what the work is in reality.
>"you should know this" does not constitute a legitimate argument. I advise you read a little about the concept of burden of proof.
Good thing then that I am trying to have a discussion with someone I assume has equivalent knowledge of music that I do, right?
You don't see every time two philosophers discuss with each other, when one brings up "strawman", the other asks "what is a strawman? can you prove it? google it for me?"
>Believe it or not, two things "tend to go along a lot" does not mean they are mutually inclusive.
That's great, but if you noticed, that's not what I was actually trying to say. Try to be a little less retarded next time.
>Those bands, AFAIK, specifically named Can as an influence. Claiming that doesn't count because other bands or genres influenced them more, or because they made a different genre of music to Can does not somehow negate that influence.
That's cool, but that's with the assumption that they all have something that Can uniquely did, which is why I brought a myriad of examples of far larger influences on the sound of those musicians. In the end, Can has very little influence that gets overinflated by a subsection of music listeners.

And keeping form with Boredoms and the thread's topic, we have Coughs:
youtube.com/watch?v=qmA7nzR20rU
youtube.com/watch?v=D1yRQmwrIVA
There's also Altered States singular jazz/noise album:
youtube.com/watch?v=HCxodRXo74c

What is this album called?

Can - Out Of Reach

Cows. Their whole discography, really.
youtube.com/watch?v=meLFGntVkB4
Midori - Nice To Meet You, We Are Midori

Thanks that sound really cool

The fuck are Windy & Carl and A.R. Kane doing on here