Holy fuck I thought this was just a meme

Holy fuck I thought this was just a meme

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=04GVf_hOB5w
youtube.com/watch?v=vKqLhrGRgMw
youtube.com/watch?v=zmFdxSedhNU
youtube.com/watch?v=5crdJgQcR3Q
youtube.com/watch?v=U6GYCrEoTPQ
youtube.com/watch?v=GxW7gcUkljk
youtube.com/watch?v=UwWFLYglsJM
youtube.com/watch?v=59YdPucCkZU
m.youtube.com/watch?v=IaLwrLRpZ1w
youtube.com/watch?v=40eN5NqKUFA
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

You thought right.

it is

nah it's bretty good

It is. This board has the worst taste in electronic music

Which albums would you recommend?

apex twin, boards of canada, autechre, the list goes on

Omg this is so cringe. I can’t believe people like this exist.

how newru

It's meh, nice programming but kind of cheesy and irritating overall.

It is

enjoy a little fun in your life for once

ok gramps

sounds like stuff KOAN Sound were doing years ago
youtube.com/watch?v=04GVf_hOB5w

it makes me think of early Prodigy stuff only more contemporary sounding and less varied

youtube.com/watch?v=vKqLhrGRgMw

This album fucking sucks. There’s nothing interesting or engaging at all, it’s just electronic noodlage

are you kidding me? this fucking sucks shit. brostep garbage

I don't like it either, but that's a retarded critique

noodling in any other genre gets shit on, why the fuck is that not a fair critique here?

this is closer to BMSR than to IGLOOGHOST. still good tho thanks for posting

>It's pointless noodling because I say so
nah, get fucked

wow great argument.

Thanks, I'll refute your other point too
>There’s nothing interesting or engaging at all
Objectively wrong, you're just being a shithead

I'm happy for you, you live in the bliss of not knowing how fucking stupid you are

©™(you)™©

Honestly I think that's a fair point but I think it's actually what appeals to me in electronic music. a lot of electronic music is too static as far as I'm concerned. Often it's about finding a loop that can withstand repetition but similarly used as an excuse to not change things up more. Artists like ighloo ghost or maxo are the opposite with less memorable hooks and more everything plus the kitchen sink maximalist production. I feel a bit rediculous liking the shit as a 25 year old and not some teenager with ADD but often it's more engaging and takes the same if not more effort to do within electronc music production

constantly propping up autechre is one of the prime examples of this board having the worst taste in electronic music

i forgot how much i enjoyed funk blaster when i first heard this song. good shit

plenty of electronic music has a lot of shit going on and changes constantly, but still sounds less cheesy

^^This

It's kind of like appreciating movies like blade runner because of their atmosphere/world-building as opposed to star wars which just has good fundamentals and simple plot. I honestly enjoyed some of his previous EPs more than this release but I appreciate a lot about what this album does for electronic music.

It's just more typical RA ADD bloops
It is just a meme

It's literally a manchild's first baby EDM album
You can find a lot of better stuff among the electronic music that normalfags listen to.

Its basically Plaid with a chimpmunk rapping over it.

To be fair the closest outfits to this in sound are Plaid, Ochre , Bonobo etc...

>ur stupid!!
>not argument
>ur stupid!!!!
>no ur stupid!
Sup Forums - Music

no, Plaid actually have interesting compositions

>CHIMPmunk

plenty of shit going on and maybe as much as really needs to happen but definitely not to the point where everey quarter note is some random one off bit. not going to argue against it being cheesy tho because i can definitely see that

definitely they're both decent sci fi films but for entirely different reasons. I can definitely appreciate someone not liking blade runner for being less about plot. it's just a taste thing. I think a lot of peoples problems with this album stem from it coming out on brainfeeder where a certain sound is expected.

clearly i need to listen to plaid. which album you guys think is best?

The elitist mindset electronic listeners have on here is hilarious considering their fighting about music made on a laptop.

Why does it matter where the music was made? I have midi of Bruckner's Symphony 8 on my laptop. Someone can compose a monumental work on a laptop.

youtube.com/watch?v=zmFdxSedhNU

Anons are so fucking pretentious about electronic music in these threads and can never name any better artists doing similar stuff. Yeah, the 90s choir sounds and all that is cheesy. That's the point. To disregard Iglooghost's entire catalog because muh cheese is totally throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I don't even enjoy his melodies or a lot of that cheesy Lopatin-influenced soundfont sounding stuff he uses, but from a pure technical perspective his music is captivating. And that's what I think it comes down to; bitter /bleep/ producers not admitting this dude is a master of his craft and somewhere they will never, ever reach, and on top of that he's trendy. EVEN if you don't like his music, you have to admit it. Years ago when he wasn't as good I would totally be on your side, but he's developed his sound and even if you don't enjoy the music, you have to admire the technicality.

WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT THING

this is pretty good but not really that comparable imo. i listened to a bit of his new album too and yeah it's got a lot going on but not to the same extent.

eh i'm sure plenty of people just don't like such frantic shit. Like if I put this album on around people and they're not into it I wouldnt be so surprised. Not even a case of them not appreciating it because they can't see the effort put into it or not understanding the constant over the top nature is the point. People can just like different things. you're being as dismissive as the people you're trying to call out. dude has definitely progressed well tho. always thought he was a bit lame before but this album took me by surprise. same thing happened with clap clap. on his past releases i saw him as a joke trying to mix footwork with african rhythms by just using elephant samples but the guy got good at his shtick

The early Plaid stuff is better. or The Black Dog. I think they kind of fell off starting with Spokes and I lost interest

I just don't think the album really has any strong musical elements. There's no memorable melodies. There's no sweeping chord progressions found on other IDM type albums. I just don't understand why everyone acts like this is so revolutionary just because its really busy.

dubs confirm

the frantic thing isn't the problem, there's plenty of Squarepusher stuff that goes further than this, and other music that goes much, much further. it's not a question of it being deep or difficult to grasp. it isn't. I don't like it because he uses too many tacky cheesy sounds, and the compositions aren't that interesting. I thought a couple parts were nice-ish but they were fleeting and too few.

Plenty of music is extremely well crafted but not worth listening to.

>There's no memorable melodies. There's no sweeping chord progressions found on other IDM type albums.
those are things that Plaid do much better

This. Find a more complex banger than Planetarium.

youtube.com/watch?v=5crdJgQcR3Q

don't really understand this comparison with Plaid, Igloo Ghost has more in common with footwork like dj rashad, with sound design elements like flying lotus and oneohtrix point never

because everyone has forgotten that artists have already done maximalist albums that have a hundred things happening at once which is what everyone is jerking off over with this EP

let me confirm that there is nothing about this album people aren't getting. What you hear is what you get. every moment on the album is fleeting.but thing is fucking packed with them. also yeah squarepusher has hectic shit as does venetian snares or whoever but it often comes down to a synth or a breakbeat being ripped to shreds as a counterpoint to something more sensibly constant as opposed to everything at the same time. that might not be a good thing. It is also what is seperating this from other albums. I really can't argue with the tacky problem but personally i'm down with constant vocal chops and shit. like that shit is done hard within soundcloud shutin e/idm but this is the first time an album like this has gotten into the mainstream

throw in some early arca and a pinch of d/p/i and yes
hook a dude up with some rec please

Its catchy but I can't even hum it, what the hell?

eh, I wasn't getting the impression of everything changing at the same time here either, tonally speaking it's relatively static

if you want to compare to something that's extremely, radically discontinuous, compare it to avant prog or postwar shit like Stockhausen or whatever. That shit is legit frantic, and confusing as fuck until you get accustomed to hearing it

NEVER SEEN ASS IN YOUR RIFLE
COLD
LAY WAN BE LIKE YOU
BEEE
GOTTA RUNNA NOSE
WANNA BE IN YOUR AS LIKE SHO
A SHIMISHA SHIMI SHASTA

then it loops

what does it mean? they say it on almost every track

youtube.com/watch?v=U6GYCrEoTPQ

its illuminati programming

This guy uses major third modulations way too much

hey nice this is actually music

bunk

rest proof clockwork is excellent too

late plaid is more reminiscent of iglooghost. listen to scintilli

It is a meme, by the literal definition of the word. And I think it was this kid's intention for it to be a sonic interpretation of meme culture (that isn't a compliment).

Like the creator, you probably have to think in memes in order to "get it." It's music for Gen Yers and Young Millennials who were raised on Spongebob, Pokemon, who probably first found the "awesomeness" of the Internet through the Hot Wheels computer they got for X-Mas at age 9, found sites like this as a pre-teen, and have been living on the Internet and thinking in memes ever since.

If there's such a thing as "Dadtronica" (heard that term before here, actually), this is "Kidtronica." Production is okay, I guess. Aesthetic is stupid. But kids like stupid shit (fidget spinners), and they're allowed to like stupid shit, so I ain't hating.

>I just don't understand why everyone acts like this is so revolutionary just because its really busy.

Power of personality. The personality and charisma of the artist often has as much to do with how the music is received as much as the musical quality itself. It's why Elvis is the King of Rock, while Carl Perkins and Gene Vincent are basically footnotes.

This kid has this "cute" naive 14 year old persona going on that appeals to Internet culture. Types in all caps, speaks in memes, etc, etc. .

shaolin wooden men ripoff

youtube.com/watch?v=GxW7gcUkljk

osamu sato too

youtube.com/watch?v=UwWFLYglsJM

what an ignorant opinion, you understand it takes skill and talent to understand the language of music right?

are you joking, dude?

Did Glanderco make the album cover?

>If there's such a thing as "Dadtronica" (heard that term before here, actually), this is "Kidtronica."
the early Prodigy stuff kinda was too

but yeah this is the sonic equivalent of a 9 year old eating warheads until his tongue starts bleeding

He's not wrong. There's just something so unexceptional about music made on a laptop (or any kind of computer) through cutting-and-pasting samples, using presets, or programming software based drum machines and synths.

>Who cares about the tools and methods. All that matters is the end result.

That's a fair argument, and a position I used to have, but with the frequency that "bedroom producers" release stuff on soundcloud and the like, "electronic" music has become a cheap commodity. Yeah, I know they spend hours and hours fiddling in FL Studio or Ableton, but the effort and time they put in still pales in comparison to the drummer with 20,000 hours of practice under his belt who actually can play odd time signatures at 200BPM with abrupt tempo and time changes rather than just tell the drum machine to do it.

>Who cares about the "how"?

The "how" has always been a key part of appreciating any piece of art. The history of how something was made can play a big role a piece's overall aesthetic (i.e. the sculptor spending countless hours chiseling away. If he just put a block of marble inside a machine to do the work, no one would give a shit, even if the machine executed his artistic idea. Same with music).

>He's not wrong. There's just something so unexceptional about music made on a laptop (or any kind of computer) through cutting-and-pasting samples, using presets, or programming software based drum machines and synths.
okay this is straight up dumb, and I suspect you don't know anything about how music is made on a laptop or really any other tools

>Yeah, I know they spend hours and hours fiddling in FL Studio or Ableton, but the effort and time they put in still pales in comparison to the drummer with 20,000 hours of practice under his belt who actually can play odd time signatures at 200BPM with abrupt tempo and time changes rather than just tell the drum machine to do it.
total gibberish non-argument, sorry

the existence of some bad music doesn't invalidate all other music made using similar tools

practicing some kind of rote physical task isn't in itself impressive and isn't the fundamental component of music

What am I looking at?

I used to be into similar frantic shit like breakcore and drill and bass IDM, but dont find this kind of thig interesting anymore

>okay this is straight up dumb, and I suspect you don't know anything about how music is made on a laptop or really any other tools

Still nowhere near as difficult as actually having a complicated musical idea and then being able to physically execute it (many times in harmony with other people who are also executing something physical). What's impressive about programming something? Tell me? This standard exists in all other forms of art (again, no one would care about a piece of sculpture done by machine [unless there was something conceptual behind it] and it's why collage died out as serious fine art in the 60s). Everyone has fuckin' ideas. Ideas are cheap. Being able to learn the necessary skills to execute them is what's more impressive. Sorry, there's nothing awe inspiring about twiddling on a computer. If you actually knew about music production, you would know the overwhelming impact MIDI had in democratizing the whole process.

>MIDI sequencing made it possible for a user with no notation skills to build complex arrangements.

>practicing some kind of rote physical task isn't in itself impressive and isn't the fundamental component of music.

Performance and the means of creation have always been a component of art. Yes, a bass guitarist plucking until his fingers break in order to get a sound is a lot more impressive than programming an 808. I'm not saying bedroom DJs, et al aren't talented, I'm just illustrating that the ease of music production afforded by modern technology has cheapened that genre of music. What used to set it apart was its novelty and even the knowledge of how electronic musicians would build their own synths, circuit bend, etc to get a sound. Now the computer basically does it for you.

I used to think like you. But the glut with which this stuff is made has made me rethink my position.

difficulty of execution isn't quality. stop listening to power metal, it's terrible

>What's impressive about programming something?
I dunno, what's impressive about composing something for an orchestra? you don't have to play that yourself either.

>This standard exists in all other forms of art (again, no one would care about a piece of sculpture done by machine [unless there was something conceptual behind it]
Are you aware of how prevalent conceptual art is now, and how very often that's exactly the point?

>Being able to learn the necessary skills to execute them is what's more impressive.
you mean like sound design, arranging and mixing? do you suppose these things simply take care of themselves if you're using a laptop?

>I'm just illustrating that the ease of music production afforded by modern technology has cheapened that genre of music.
no, they've empowered people to do things that weren't previously possible for any musician

>What used to set it apart was its novelty and even the knowledge of how electronic musicians would build their own synths, circuit bend, etc to get a sound. Now the computer basically does it for you.
what the fuck kind of nonsense is this? are you familiar with DAWs at all? or a hardware synth? they don't do shit for you. You can use presets, but it's not any different from using presets on synths 35 years ago.

>difficulty of execution isn't quality.

Quality is obviously subjective, but what often adds to the "quality" of something is how it was executed. Again, a sculpture created by a machine wouldn't raise any fuckin' eyebrows. But when you think about Rodin slaving over the creation of piece for years, you have something.

>I dunno, what's impressive about composing something for an orchestra? you don't have to play that yourself either.

Composers are typically good to great pianists and have to know notation and theory inside and out. The degree of difficulty of composing in MIDI is not in the same universe.

>Are you aware of how prevalent conceptual art is now, and how very often that's exactly the point?

Conceptual art is about the "idea," the thing itself really doesn't matter. That's the point. But when appreciating non-concept art, yeah, the how is pretty important.

>you mean like sound design, arranging and mixing? do you suppose these things simply take care of themselves if you're using a laptop?

The computer makes those things a hell of a lot easier, and allows a user with little-to-no musicianship or compositional skills (writing notation) to create music. My argument is that artistic creation should exceptional, something exceedingly difficult to do. Technology has made that entire process easier and more "democratic," leading to over-saturation. With autotune, everyone can be a pitch perfect singer. With drum machines, everyone is a percussionist. With MIDI sequencing, everyone is a composer.

>no, they've empowered people to do things that weren't previously possible for any musician

Computer graphics have "empowered" filmmakers to do things not previously possible, and they look like shit. Wow. A CGI car chase. How about when stunt drivers actually used to have perform a meticulous choreographed chase in real time, and if they fucked up, no fixing anything in post. Time to do another take.

/char limit.

>My argument is that artistic creation should exceptional, something exceedingly difficult to do.
It's still hard to make something good, sorry you think it's all done by magic but that's your own personal retardation. Electronic music that people actually listen to isn't shat out by 14 year old novices.

>Technology has made that entire process easier and more "democratic," leading to over-saturation.
You're confusing much of this with means of distribution. Just because you don't get to hear all the unlistenable garbage Bubba put to 4 track in the 80s doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

>With autotune, everyone can be a pitch perfect singer.
No, that's not how it works.

>With drum machines, everyone is a percussionist.
no, sorry

>With MIDI sequencing, everyone is a composer.
no.

Everyone has a word processor, typewriter or a pen. Is everyone a poet? Does that dilute poetry? Is poetry now trivial?

>what the fuck kind of nonsense is this? are you familiar with DAWs at all? or a hardware synth? they don't do shit for you. You can use presets, but it's not any different from using presets on synths 35 years ago.

Tell me how you get a "sound" in a DAW? Do you have to know anything about how certain resistances and uf values can change the frequency of an electrical signal and thus change the sound?

No. You don't. You can start out with any tone and fiddle around with the shifting, stretching, et al options until you find a sound you like.

Agree to disagree, really. I just don't find the sitting-at-the-computer-fiddling creative process (pertaining to music) all that interesting anymore.

>Tell me how you get a "sound" in a DAW? Do you have to know anything about how certain resistances and uf values can change the frequency of an electrical signal and thus change the sound?
At what point in the history of electronic music was this ever the composer's concern? Louis Barron probably thought about that. But for everyone else that has nothing whatsoever to do with making music.

>You can start out with any tone and fiddle around with the shifting, stretching, et al options until you find a sound you like.
Like every synth ever.

>I just don't find the sitting-at-the-computer-fiddling creative process (pertaining to music) all that interesting anymore.
That's still just your problem

AOTY

>It's still hard to make something good, sorry you think it's all done by magic but that's your own personal retardation.

Compared to past methods, it basically is.

>You're confusing much of this with means of distribution. Just because you don't get to hear all the unlistenable garbage Bubba put to 4 track in the 80s doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Learning software is still a lot easier than learning to play a instrument proficiently, learning notation, learning theory. And yes, digital distribution is also a problem, Bubba didn't "deserve" to be distributed until his gets his chops (if ever). And Lil #4985085 also doesn't deserve it.

Autotune was literally invented to correct shitty singers. "That's not how it works." Lol.

So a drum machine can't turn someone with zero drumming skills into a percussionist? Sure. When's the last time you saw Dilla playing the drums?

>Everyone has a word processor, typewriter or a pen. Is everyone a poet? Does that dilute poetry? Is poetry now trivial?

False analogy. If a word processor made somebody who can't read nor write into a poet, then the analogy would work. Until then...

lol

any given song off of this by itself is pretty impressive but the whole thing together is just a flabby block of sound it's too much and too repetitive and the dynamics are too muted. it's a good concept, a good sound, and its complexity is initially intriguing but it's actually super shallow

sounds literally nothing like this, but this was kinda cool anyways.

>Learning software is still a lot easier than learning to play a instrument proficiently, learning notation, learning theory.
I like how you're lumping writing, arranging, sound design and mixing all under the heading of "learning software" as though it takes care of itself once you've learned the keyboard shortcuts. Someone using a DAW is also responsible for things that are traditionally the role of the producer, recording engineer, etc. Those require skills as well.

>Autotune was literally invented to correct shitty singers. "That's not how it works." Lol.
So this guy is a good singer now?
youtube.com/watch?v=59YdPucCkZU

>False analogy. If a word processor made somebody who can't read nor write into a poet, then the analogy would work. Until then...
How the fuck is the "learning to write music that doesn't suck" part just totally invisible to you?

so iglooghost is at such a level that all you can compare him to is one of the known greats within electronic music? or is your point that nobody should bother with music because the beatles already happened? song you linked is sick

Lmao this is either a really bad troll or you are just that sad. I'm classically trained and have been playing piano for over 12 years. Can pretty much play most Liszt, Chopin whatever technical piece you want. Being able to play an instrument literally doesn't mean anything in terms of creativity unless you're talking about improvisation. You can get some 5 year old chinese girl to play the Transcendental etudes or something like that but they don't know shit about creativity. Compositional skills? Notation? Give me a fucking break. No one cares if you can write a hemi-demi-semi quaver or slur or know all the names for playing softly or very loud or at a walking pace. Your analogy makes no sense. A machine making a sculpture that from a creative or design standpoint would be closer to someone making a piece of music. Being able to create strong melodies, write great counterpoint, and craft interesting harmonies with good voice leading doesn't require the skill to play an instrument. It just requires a creative mind, a good ear to recreate what you hear in your head, and some knowledge of harmony/melody either through teaching or from hearing other songs.

>There's no memorable melodies. There's no sweeping chord progressions found on other IDM type albums.

This is a brain on fantano. Cant possibly understand music outside the most pedestrian conception of it.
>my rattling hi hats
>my groove

Stop larping online. People have always been amused and appreciated virtuosity. Difficult music, physically and conceptually, will always have an audience and to dismiss it bevause YOU personally dont care for it is arrogant. Virtuosity is as much part of the artistic process as the incredibly subjective idea of "creativity".

m.youtube.com/watch?v=IaLwrLRpZ1w

Well, it's really not particularly melodic or tonally interesting, Plaid are far better as far as that stuff goes.

>At what point in the history of electronic music was this ever the composer's concern? Louis Barron probably thought about that. But for everyone else that has nothing whatsoever to do with making music.

The point is that those artists would have to use non-music making objects (record players, tape recorders, electrical circuits) and/or modify existing instruments in a creative and experimental way to produce a sound they were after. The method wasn't as cut-and-paste as it is today. Now you can "find" those sounds in your DAW while you laugh at memes.

>That's still just your problem

A lot of people still value the how, the means. The "ends" isn't always the only important part of any process. Would we appreciate Coltrane the same way if he composed a MIDI sax to blow a solo?

Probably not.

it's not terrible, just overrated a ton. glad iglooghost is getting some semi-mainstream exposure though, since he started off posting in soundcloud threads on here. he's our boy all grown up *wipes tear*

this is retarded gibberish

if you're solely impressed by things that are difficult to do, go see a fucking circus or something. there are clowns that can juggle while riding a unicycle and everything

Gee, look at you finding a completely valid example of human beings appreciating something due to the difficulty/spectacle behind it yet excluding from music for no reason whatsoever.
Music is a performance art. Virtuosity is part of performance.

>Computer graphics have "empowered" filmmakers to do things not previously possible, and they look like shit. Wow. A CGI car chase.
youtube.com/watch?v=40eN5NqKUFA

>The point is that those artists would have to use non-music making objects (record players, tape recorders, electrical circuits) and/or modify existing instruments in a creative and experimental way to produce a sound they were after.
no, not really. composers weren't typically involved with that side of things, and if they were (the only examples I can think of are Hugh Le Caine, Raymond Scott and David Tudor - and Hugh Le Caine wasn't really much of a composer either), building the tools is a totally separate process from writing the music. Most early electronic music composers really weren't that technical; other people designed and built the tools. The ones that wanted to get more technical were more often involved in (lol) computer music. You can still get as autistic as you want today with Max/MSP or SuperCollider or whatever. And it's still just using a laptop like everyone else.

Strawman. I never said that being able to play an instrument automatically qualifies anyone as musically competent. My argument, as he alluded to here , is that musicianship has always been a highly valued part of music (and yes, musicianship in this case does mean a musician who can be "creative" and just not play by strict rote). DAWs and the like threaten to remove that facet of music entirely. What used to be the biggest barrier to entry for music creation is the daunting task of learning an instrument (or instruments) proficiently enough to execute whatever musical ideas you have. Now that step can be skipped over, and I see that as a loss.