Overrated albums thread

Overrated albums thread

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_Milk_Hotel#Influence
popshifter.com/2009-05-30/top-five-post-neutral-milk-hotel-bands/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

you first

You're a faggot. If you don't like this album or at least see why it has the acclaim it has you should probably get off Sup Forums right now

“Overrated” should only refer to things which are actually bad, but have critical and popular approval. It should not refer to things that you happen to not like.

not overrated if it's good

...

>actually bad, but have critical and popular approval
But if it has critical and popular approval, its probably not bad

...

not op, but i like itaots and i still think its really overrated, something doesnt have to be dogshit for it to be overrated you dips

>i still think its really overrated
Why?

I genuinely dont think its overrated. I really do think its as close as an album has come to being perfect.

its a decent album but i dont really get why people think its particularly influential or groundbreaking, and even if it was that shouldnt inflate the quality or your enjoyment of the music

>why people think its particularly influential or groundbreaking
Because it is.

Name albums that sound like it that came before it
>and even if it was that shouldnt inflate the quality
Of course it should

Have you listened to your local top-40 station?

It deserves every single bit of praise it gets.

>critical approval

>Because it is.
>Name albums that sound like it that came before it
name albums that sound like it that came after it. any album can be called influential and groundbreaking if you reach far enough, its not like every album strives to be itaots, and not every album should
>Of course it should
but thats ridiculous. it may impact how we look back on it, but at the end of the day music should be judged on how it sounds and your personal taste. drake has been influential to modern pop but noone on here is talking about him because his music is shit

...

Queen in general is super fucking overrated

>name albums that sound like it that came after it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_Milk_Hotel#Influence
>but thats ridiculous
Not really. Since quality is completely subjective, it should be discard as criteria for good music. Only influence should be considered because it is more objective

>name albums that sound like it that came after it
popshifter.com/2009-05-30/top-five-post-neutral-milk-hotel-bands/

Aumgn is shit and you know it

Moron.

literally every mid 60s Beatles and Kinks album sounds like it, SF Sorrow, Balaklava, Dusk at Cubist Castle and a lot of other records. It isn't exactly the poster child for originality, it just has very high quality while being of that type

>literally every mid 60s Beatles and Kinks album sounds like it
No
>SF Sorrow, Balaklava, Dusk at Cubist Castle and a lot of other records
No

Grasping for straws user.

i feel bad for you

What are the flaws?

agreed. monster movie is wayyyyy better

I can agree that this being touted as the perfect album is pretty obnoxious. I absolutely love it to bits but would never call it flawless. Mind you it's the only piece of media that has made me tear up.

This thing however is slow and boring compared to old swans.

alright you got me, but i stand by statement that it should have nothing to do with the quality or enjoyment of music
>Not really. Since quality is completely subjective, it should be discard as criteria for good music.
quality isnt completely subjective, a song can have effective melodies, well written lyrics etc. your own taste is subjective though
>Only influence should be considered because it is more objective
so youre saying that you would hold an album you personally like underneath one that you dont because the first is more influential? thats insane. its okay to bring up influence but it should never affect the score it gets or a critical review, positively or negatively

>a song can have effective melodies, well written lyrics etc
How so?
>so youre saying that you would hold an album you personally like underneath one that you dont because the first is more influential?
What I like is irrelevant
>its okay to bring up influence but it should never affect the score it gets or a critical review
Would you really let your enjoyment/dislike of an album affect the objective quality of the album? That's insane

Pop music tends to be critically acclaimed.

>How so?
dude i dont fucking know i post on Sup Forums i know nothing about objectively analysing music, but i know that writing in songs can be bad and good, mastering can be clear or messy etc. these things can do both good and bad for an album and but it depends on how well they work together. having clean production and muddy vocals clearly wont gel, and you can enjoy it all you want but its a fact
>What I like is irrelevant.
i didnt ask you what music you liked, i proposed a scenario based on the rules you set out to show how illogical your thinking is
>Would you really let your enjoyment/dislike of an album affect the objective quality of the album? That's insane
har har, but to me that makes more sense than basing it off of how many artists aped off of the music. i get where youre coming from, i really do, but to me influence and even originality arent things that affect my enjoyment of music or any medium

not saying its a bad album. I do enjoy it. but horn arrangements, anne frank lyrics, tempo changes, and purposely half-assed mixing is not what i would consider a perfect album.

my friend and I covered covered this vinyl in gasoline and lit it on fire.

>dude i dont fucking know
Opinion discarded
>i proposed a scenario based on the rules you set out to show how illogical your thinking is
And I explained my preference is irrelevant.
>but to me that makes more sense
It also makes why you wouldn't understand the influence/context of NMH. You just think of music in terms of "I like this!".
>but horn arrangements, anne frank lyrics, tempo changes
No I'm asking for flaws, not good parts of the album

you cant listen to music objectively, everything comes down to what you like and what you don't.

an actual human being here

See

nigger

an actual non musician here

mmmmmmm please link your emo slowcore bandcamp

>And I explained my preference is irrelevant.
well it actually is in that scenario but okay
>It also makes why you wouldn't understand the influence/context of NMH. You just think of music in terms of "I like this!".
its better than thinking of music in terms of "what musicians did this influence"
>No I'm asking for flaws, not good parts of the album
youre contradicting yourself. why is that a good part? is it because other bands have horn segments? is itaots good to you because it was influenced by anne franks diary? make up your mind

>well it actually is in that scenario
How so?
>its better than thinking of music in terms of "what musicians did this influence"
You mean better than using critical reasoning and listening skills?
>youre contradicting yourself
How so?
>why is that a good part? is it because other bands have horn segments?
Show me other albums about Anne Frank.

Literally who?
I mean I'm no expert but if an album was to be considered so immensely influential, shouldn't it have a little more "influence" than just inspiring a few rando bands? For example: King Crimson launching a whole new genre.

I still disagree. Plenty of "good" records had little to no influence at all, and if the true criteria for what you consider to be "objectively" good music was influence, then 808s & Heartbreak is the greatest album of the last century and ITAOTS made little more than ripples in the indie rock scene.
And even then, what you consider to be influential might not be the same as everyone elses if you take into consideration what aspects of music people listen to, preferred genres/musicians, favorite era, etc.
To somebody who listens to 60s folk more than 60s pop, Bob Dylan would be a much more influential musician than The Beatles.
To somebody who listens to more 90s grunge than 90s shoegaze, Nirvana is a much more influential musician than My Bloody Valentine.
It really does all come down to perspective, no matter which way you cut it. I just don't see how thats a bad thing. I consider the things that I like to be "more important" than things I don't. Thats just how it works.

>implying you would enjoy more albums if they were about anne frank

you fucking faggot

You've never heard of Arcade Fore or The Microphones?
>King Crimson launching a whole new genre.
What are you referencing here?
>I still disagree.
Yeah I would think someone who just listens to music for feels would

Nice strawman

There's really nothing else to listen to music for, and not just "feels" from an emotional standpoint, but from an enjoyment standpoint. Albums like ITAOTS (which I do think is a 10/10 record btw) aren't very complex, but I still find an enjoyment from hearing the arrangements. If somebody only listened to Powerviolence or Black Midi they're doing it because they like the way the genres "feel". I don't get you're argument.
My point is: people listen to music because other people say its good. They continue to listen to it if they enjoy it.

>To somebody who listens to 60s folk more than 60s pop, Bob Dylan would be a much more influential musician than The Beatles.
>To somebody who listens to more 90s grunge than 90s shoegaze, Nirvana is a much more influential musician than My Bloody Valentine.
>It really does all come down to perspective, no matter which way you cut it. I just don't see how thats a bad thing. I consider the things that I like to be "more important" than things I don't. Thats just how it works.
What do all these people have in common?

They all are musically short sighted

>what is music appreciation

Sorry, 1 meh band 1 bretty good band and a few nobodies. I still don't see how this album can be seen as being as influential as people say it is.

King Crimson, In the Court of the Crimson King to prog rock

>t. soyboys
>tfw breathing toxic vinyl smoke fumes causes less cancer than listening to the album

we did it in a public park and cops came and we had to run.

If you are the same person dickriding NMH like theyre the messiah of music, you are far more musically short sighted than any of the hypothetical people i had mentioned

sounds fun desu

>meh
Irrelevant
>bretty good
Irrelevant
>nobodies
Irrelevant
>I still don't see how this album can be seen as being as influential
Did you read those articles?
>King Crimson, In the Court of the Crimson King to prog rock
Already pioneered by Frank Zappa

I would at least assume you are familiar with music before you post on a music board

>How so?
because you said that only influence should be considered and i proposed a scenario where that challenged that and you ignored it cause you realised it made no sense
>You mean better than using critical reasoning and listening skills?
youre not sherlock holmes because you found a page on wikipedia showing bands that draw inspiration from itaots, you know. its not critical reasoning to base music solely on how influential it is, thats actually quite narrow minded. is any new album bad automatically because noone has had the chance to use it as inspiration? is the first album ever also the best because it inspired others to make music? your arguments make no sense
>Show me other albums about Anne Frank.
i cant, i guess it cant have been that influential then

why do I try to discuss things on Sup Forums

Chief Keef and k-pop have influenced far more people in gen z musically than ITAOTS, this is a stupid argument

>cops see fire from distance
>get out of car
>sprint towards fire to put it out
>see cover next to burning vinyl
>"holy fucking shit"
>begin shooting burning LP with guns
>return to vehicle and leave
>justice served

bleh even viruses spread

>i guess it cant have been that influential then

kek

How so?
>because you said that only influence should be considered and i proposed a scenario where that challenged that
Your scenario failed, because taste is irrelevant.
>its not critical reasoning to base music solely on how influential it is, thats actually quite narrow minded.
Not really, because it takes taste out of the equation, and you are forced to deal with the pure musical components. If you are musically unintelligent, I can see why you'd avoid this mindset though
>i guess it cant have been that influential then
Goalpost shifting
>why do I discuss music on a music discussion board
Huh

Why are you bothering, the entire board is lost.

Fight me

Because ITAOTS isnt nearly as influential as you think it is. Yes, there are bands that have sprung up that take partial influence from it, but its not influential in the same way that, say, Bob Dylan influenced all of popular music.

...

sketches of spain is better

(((they))) want idiots to buy what they're selling. just because (((they))) try to ram it in you doesn't mean you should spread your ass and believe them when they tell you that you enjoy it.

stop watching MDE you fucking faggot

>A band 20 years old is not as influential as an artist 50 years old
WOW YA THUNK?
Not really.

...

Itaots is my favourite album and I also think it's overrated by many people. Not all of them obviously.

That's because you thought it was a funny little meme you found on Sup Forums

Anything from Deathgrips.

They're literally My Little Pony tier in trying to show everyone how great their music is and make it part of their identity.

>ITAOTS made little more than ripples in the indie rock scene
i never even heard of it until 2016. i though the sticky was a cut potato or something. between my and my 2 brothers, we own like +2000 albums, too.

that logic doesnt hold up. Bob Dylan was hugely influential just a couple of years into his career.
what the fuck am i doing, ITAOTS is one of my favorite albums of all time and I'm fucking arguing with somebody about it who also enjoys it. fuck this gay website.

>Your scenario failed, because taste is irrelevant.
i dont care about your taste, im holding you to the same standard you're holding me to. you said that influence is the only thing that matters and when confronted with that you cant see that it's dumb
>>its not critical reasoning to base music solely on how influential it is, thats actually quite narrow minded
>Not really, because it takes taste out of the equation, and you are forced to deal with the pure musical components. If you are musically unintelligent, I can see why you'd avoid this mindset though
well done on dodging the part where i explain myself, so please read again and actually confront what I said, but please see this post someone else made that you responded to by insulting them instead of actually taking in what they said, like the short sighted person you are. music is different for everyone, you dont hold all musical knowledge in the world and i dont either. its useless trying to judge music objectively, especially when you do it using ONE factor: influence.
>Goalpost shifting
not even slightly goalpost shifting at all, you have proven it isnt as influential as you think and I pointed it out.

literally lol'd

Being overrated does not necessarily correlate to quality. ITAOTS is a brilliant album. It's raw, emotional and has excellent instrumental and vocal work. However, literally everyone who is slightly interested in exploring rock music and their parrician-minded mother has heard of it, raved about it, and talked about it to no end when the discussion has been had a million times already. It's like Dark Side of the Moon. Fantastic album, but so widely talked about that you get burnt out hearing about it over and over again.
So, something can be absolutely excellent and still be overrated. We'really not trashing ITAOTS, but we'll recognize that it's been played to death.

So I'm pretty new to the genre and I really don't understand why this album is so hyped, it's not bad it's just... Okay. Kid A and In rainbows are infinitely better.

Also these

>Bob Dylan was hugely influential just a couple of years into his career
That's because he had the mechanism of promotion as well as a big budget, which Neutral Milk did not. A better comparison would be them and Velvet Underground.
>i dont care about your taste
Then why did you make it a part of the scenario? Maybe you need to rethink your logic.
>and when confronted with that
What do you mean?
>so please read again and actually confront what I said
What do you want me to respond to specifically? Restate it and I will
>but please see this post someone else made
Already refuted that here It's more musical intelligence.
>not even slightly goalpost shifting at all
Of course it is. We were discussing innovation, not influence

>everyone who is slightly interested in exploring rock music and their parrician-minded mother has heard of it
i honestly doubt this. i'm pretty sure only Sup Forums fags and coffee shop hipsters have heard of it.

Yeah that's why Stephen Colbert name drops them all the time and they show up on Parks & Rec?

No

>spending 3hrs defending your Sup Forums thread

They're severely underrated on Sup Forums.

guess that means they aren't overrated. please kill yourself

>>i dont care about your taste
>Then why did you make it a part of the scenario? Maybe you need to rethink your logic.
my logic is that you said that only influence should be regarded and...

>What do you mean?
when i show a time that that idea is challenged you just say "my taste is irrelevant". youre running yourself in circles

>What do you want me to respond to specifically? Restate it and I will
i said this. if you didnt read it then clearly you dont actually care about debating this and if you did then you still dont care because you cant take being wrong sometimes
>is any new album bad automatically because noone has had the chance to use it as inspiration? is the first album ever also the best because it inspired others to make music? your arguments make no sense

>Already refuted that here
>It's more musical intelligence.
okay you must be trolling at this point but for the benefit of the doubt ill keep responding

>>not even slightly goalpost shifting at all
>Of course it is. We were discussing innovation, not influence
the following is the main thing you said that we have been talking about:
>>>>>>
>>name albums that sound like it that came after it.
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_Milk_Hotel#Influence
>>but thats ridiculous
>Not really. Since quality is completely subjective, it should be discard as criteria for good music. Only influence should be considered because it is more objective
>>>>>
not once do you say innovation. youre the one changing the goalposts

i've never heard him mention them. last i saw he had ghost on a few years ago. then again, that guy turned into a massive faggot that hasn't been in anything good since strangers with candy, and all the people still entertained by him are idiots with 0 taste in any kind of entertainment... w-wait a minuite.. WHICH TOTALLY EXPLAINS WHY YOU LIKE THE GARBAGE ALBUM YOURE DEFENDING! You just blew my fucking mind. carry on, faggot

>Not really, because it takes taste out of the equation

There's no way you can honestly believe that judging music based on your own taste is "narrow minded" compared to simply reading up on how often an album is cited as an influence by other artists. Besides, there are no "musical components" being discussed when you point at what bands tend to be cited as an influence more than others. That's like saying the musical composition of a Beatles album should be considered a superior musical achievement to that of Trout Mask Replica, simply because they had more influence on western music and culture.

Just stop please. Stop arguing about benign shit on an image board and go and listen to the music you like.

>when i show a time that that idea is challenged you just say "my taste is irrelevant".
Correct. It is. What don't you understand? There is no flaw in this logic that you think you are uncovering.
>is any new album bad automatically because noone has had the chance to use it as inspiration?
No, we then must look at how innovative it is.
>not once do you say innovation
Except See the post it was replying to (). You mention "groundbreaking". So obviously both innovation AND influence are your criteria. Unless you changed your mind?
>i've never heard him mention them
Guess you should do your homework before posting then
>That's like saying the musical composition of a Beatles album should be considered a superior musical achievement to that of Trout Mask Replica,
Well, it is.
>>>/reddit/

but wheres the fun in that? besides, who says im not listening to music i like while i argue? :^)

I'll take two anons having an honest argument over shitposting any day of the week

It's mostly because of Fuck Tha Police and because it's one of the first big Gangsta Rap albums. IT sounds shitty and outdated today but at the time it was pretty dope.

>I really don't understand why this album is so hyped
Lack of context

I don't see anything wrong with really liking this album. It's the culmination of a lot of different things that would appeal to any anglosphere teen.
I do agree with this though.

>Guess you should do your homework before posting then
YEAH DUDE, IM GONNA GO STUDY MY STEPHEN COLBERT SHIT SO I CAN ARGUE WITH MASSIVE ANONYMOUS FAGGOT WITH POOR TASTE ON THE INTERNET. BE. RIGHT. BACK. (im sure you'll still be here)