What do I have to do to get this?

What do I have to do to get this?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-rock#Characteristics
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_rock#Definition_and_characteristics
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Be under 5'8

killing yourself (unironically though)

buy it

Listen to The Bends, Ok Computer, then Kid A in that order. It puts the story and progression of the band into perspective.

you're not missing anything it's just mediocre

See a shooting star

This

Such a beautiful song about the fading of the heart, relinquished from the heavens to pierce the tears of sorrow. In fact, the entire album is an absolute masterpiece. No matter how hard you try, no mere mortal's mind will ever begin to penetrate the rhombus cave of lilac dreams that is Kid A. In fact, Kid A is a broken album. Only one would use its pieces to scar themselves into a sanctuary of flames.

It was a once-in-a-lifetime album. It came at the most perfect time in history, when the world flooded itself with uncertainty and ambiguity. It questioned how life would become with its abstract ideas and esoteric narratives, that truly made it a timeless masterpiece of surrealism. Thom's poignant lyricism, such as the beginning track, harkens back to a past that never happened. It evoked the vision of a wizard trapped inside a bat's eyeball, as solitary punishment for his crass destruction. He paints himself with the three cans of potions, in order to disguise himself from the fangs.

Burn 200 copies of it.

Trust me, it works.

watch a dead baby on IMAX

Is this like a meme around here or what?
I've only been regularly visiting this board for about a week and this is like the third or fourth similar thread.

By "get" what do you even mean? Enjoy it?
If you've listened to it multiple times and you're not enjoying it why even bother, the album isn't even especially groundbreaking or obscure it's not one that requires you to "try" at all.

They have several much better albums (in my personal opinion obviously) anyway.

Watch IMAX on a dead baby

Nothing.
Kid A is praised because it was somewhat innovative for its time not because it's actually that good.

Right. They were a cockrock band who appropriated the style/culture of more talented electronic musicians (Aphex Twin, Amon Tobin) to achieve a watered down and ineffective stab at electronic and ambient material. That context is important.

I'm just joking, it's a wonderful album and I still remember specific moments in my life in relation to it, which is increasingly rare.

>They were a cockrock band
>says Crazium
Makes sense

nothing. It's a pop album what's there to get?

Did you even bother to read the second half of the post?

How is this a pop album?

Someone post the Turn On the Bright Lights pasta

no u

listen to idioteque on loop and keep muttering "faster" under your breath

>ITT: people pretending like Kid A is hard to "get"
There is nothing special about liking this album. It's experimental, it's got some great moments, if you don't like electronic music, you might find it a bit boring.

No, I have literally seen you say retarded shit unironically for like 5 years now.

I no longer give you the benefit of the doubt

Okay champ.

I know this is a meme but how could somebody unironically believe this?

Be a white boy

To be fair, free jazz and dense electronic sounds in 10/4 time are definitely pop

It's b8. The user is confusing pop music (the genre) with popular music (one of Tagg's Axiomatic Triangle of the three musical distinctions).

Castrate yourself.

Brent DiCrescenzo is a eunuch

how is it not?
>number 1 billboard album
>record number of sales within the first album
>rated highly by pop music reviewers
>
>songs follow standard rock and electronic music song structures
>both rock and electronic music are forms of popular music
>songs are basically pop songs with electronic influences
It's an experimental pop album.

>sales
Does not dictate musical genre
>songs follow standard rock and electronic music song structures
But you just said it was a pop album, not a rock or electronic album. Make up your mind

>Does not dictate musical genre
in the case of POPULAR music, it does. If its popular, its pop music. That is literally the definition of pop music.
Also rock and electronic are styles of pop music. They are a subgenre of pop music, not exclusive genres.

Pop and popular aren't strictly the same thing.

>in the case of POPULAR music,
Nice backpedaling

pop literally stands for popular. what's your point?
You asked me why I thought sales dictated it as a genre, so I explained why.

>You asked me why I thought sales dictated it as a genre
I don't think you understanding the difference between pop music and popular music

>Amon Tobin

they sound nothing like Tobin though. you're better off picking Kraftwerk or some glitch artist.

Stop replying to namefags and trips. You’re worse than they are. Stop enabling them.

Try the best you can

there is no difference. Even if it isn't strictly what's popular, it still is pop music.
>Although much of the music that appears on record charts is seen as pop music, the genre is distinguished from chart music. Pop music is eclectic, and often borrows elements from other styles such as urban, dance, rock, Latin, and country
Radiohead is also eclectic and they draw heavily from rock and dance music
>Identifying factors include generally short to medium-length songs written in a basic format (often the verse-chorus structure), as well as common use of repeated choruses, melodic tunes, and hooks.
radiohead does all of these things

Nothing, just accept it's not your thing. I can't get how people don't get it. So there's that. Our brains just process music differently probably. Not saying I'm smarter or anything, but you should just stop trying to get it. That's not how it works, and not what's enjoyable either. It just happens naturally

fuck

Friendo's Guide for Listening to Music

1. read about album or piece to understand context and themes, composition too if you're into that
2. listen to album, keeping what you read in mind

!!IMPORTANT STEP!!

3. if you didn't enjoy it, listen a maximum of once more
a. if you still didn't enjoy or "get" it, LISTEN TO SOMETHING ELSE
b. if you did enjoy or "get" it, listen again and possibly discuss it with others

There, now you never have to make a thread like this again.

Pop is a genre that derived from a collective intention towards targeting the most popular demographic. It also has features that are largely absent from Kid A (ABABCAB structure, distinct and unmuddied melodies, clear vocals/lyrics, 3/4 and 4/4 time, and sticking to a simple timbral rhythm the entire time).

These are the basic ingredients of pop, and there are too many ways Kid A deviates from the basic qualifiers to be considered a true pop album.

>there is no difference
Incorrect.
>Radiohead is also eclectic and they draw heavily from rock and dance music
That's because they are a rock band with electronic influences, not a pop band.
>radiohead does all of these things
Explain the basic format and the chorus of the title track of the album we are discussing.

nice pasta

I got it at a thrift store in Salt Lake City, but a safer bet would probably be your local record store

The experience and emotions tied to listening to Kid A are like witnessing the stillborn birth of a child while simultaneously having the opportunity to see her play in the afterlife on Imax. It's an album of sparking paradox. It's cacophonous yet tranquil, experimental yet familiar, foreign yet womb-like, spacious yet visceral, textured yet vaporous, awakening yet dreamlike, infinite yet 48 minutes. It will cleanse your brain of those little crustaceans of worries and inferior albums clinging inside the fold of your gray matter. The harrowing sounds hit from unseen angles and emanate with inhuman genesis. When the headphones peel off, and it occurs that six men (Nigel Godrich included) created this, it's clear that Radiohead must be the greatest band alive, if not the best since you know who. Breathing people made this record! And you can't wait to dive back in and try to prove that wrong over and over.

It was a stupid shitpost. I don't seriously think they sound like Amon Tobin (though they do sound like certain early Aphex Twin songs occasionally).

>hasn't heard I care because you do yet

Suck a lemon, obviously

rock and electronic music are types of pop music
>Explain the basic format and the chorus of the title track of the album we are discussing.
>Intro
>layers build on top of each other
>chorus 1: We've got heads on sticks
You've got ventriloquists
We've got heads on sticks
And you've got ventriloquists
>chorus 2: Standing in the shadows at the end of my bed
Standing in the shadows at the end of my bed
Lying in the shadows at the end of my bed
Standing in the shadows at the end of my bed
>outro

I can see you guys are still struggling to grasp this.

>rock and electronic music are types of pop music
Incorrect. They are types of POPULAR MUSIC. Look it up
>chorus
It's not a chorus because it doesn't repeat and it's not a hook

Try again.

you want me to write a really pretentious 1000 word essay on why I think it's a good album, so you can copy it and paste it in other threads?

>rock and electronic music are types of pop music
Not really. This Heat is a rock album, and SAW II is an electronic album. Neither are by any stretch "pop" music.

>We've got heads on sticks you've got ventriloquists
>doesn't repeat
>Standing in the shadows at the end of my bed
>doesn't repeat
nice one

Chart out the song and show its a hook the is catchy.

He's talking about the segments repeating you fool. They don't, and have the same musical structure as the verses. Nobody in their right mind would call those sections hooks or choruses.

>He's talking about the segments repeating you fool
depends on what you consider segments
how is it possible to show something is "catchy" I mean, it rhymes, which makes it memorable. It repeats, which also makes it memorable. It repeats and follows a consistent melody, which makes it memorable. What else do you want? I'm not going to transpose fucking kid a to sheet music and do a harmonic analysis of it.

This.
Try In Rainbows, That's my personal favorite.

I want namefags and tripfags to go back to upvote land. This is not the place for anyone to attempt at building a personality. Then we can discuss properly.

>how is it possible to show something is "catchy"
You don't know music theory, do you?

I guess you should reevaluate your argument if you are unable to prove it. Try again.

They literally play one after the other and don't repeat at any point in the song. That's not a hook or a chorus.

I wouldn't say he's co fusing them it's just that pop is a shortening of popular

the rhythm, note played, and pentameter are consistent. A one note chorus isn't exactly something foreign in the realm of pop music.

If you don't think Sup Forums is already reddit then you need to go back.

Is 'How to disappear completely' from that album? That's the only memorable track for me, because the electronic drony bleeps and bloops part of the album either hasn't aged well or simply isn't very good.

Sorry what does co fusing mean?

>because the electronic drony bleeps and bloops part of the album either hasn't aged well
Sounds like you haven't aged well

The semantic refutation is to claim that "pop" is a subgenre of "popular" and argue from there on, which basically invalidates any argument you might have pertaining to the trichotomy.

Not really, because genre is defined by musical characteristics, why Tagg's Trichotomy is defined by social and anthropological characteristics. They should be two separate ways of classifying music.

you're probably expecting the wrong things from music. Learn to appreciate subtle changes and sounds, and see how it makes you feel. Don't go in it with any kind of expectation. It's hard to do so try to listen just before you fall asleep as you will be in that state naturally. See how it affects you then, you might start noticing interesting atmospheres or memories that start to come up. See how it all plays out in your head. It's not an extraverted album, keep that in mind. If you're naturally more extraverted you probably won't connect in the same way.
So, don't try to forc anything, keep an open mind and don't feel bad if you don't get it. Alright, that was my more thoughtful response, now let's get back to mocking with greentext

>genre is defined by musical characteristics
(not true, by the way)

Utah bro?

Then it probably isn't a very good. Opinions, I guess. That track is good though.

>(not true, by the way)
Look it up

>Then it probably isn't a very good.
Why not?

I have. You don't understand what you're talking about.

Incorrect. I don't think you don't understand what you're talking about.

Your argument hinges on the premise that these terms are prescriptive in nature. They are not, discounting genres like string quartet within art music which actually do follow this trend of formal genre classification. In pop music (which we are discussing), genre is derived from mutual intelligibility and nothing else. That's why we have genres like post-rock, progressive rock and krautrock. You would be hard pressed to describe these genres purely with musical traits (note: "influence" is not a musical trait).

>discounting genres like string quartet within art music which actually do follow this trend of formal genre classification
When did I do that?
>genre is derived from mutual intelligibility and nothing else.
Incorrect. There are specific musical characteristics of pop music. I am suspicious that you claim otherwise, as you should know by now
>You would be hard pressed to describe these genres purely with musical traits
Then you must not know much about post-rock, progressive rock and krautrock

>When did I do that?
You misread the post. I'm saying that art music is the only real type of music that uses genre in the way you describe.
>Incorrect.
This has been demonstrated many times over.
>Then you must not know much about post-rock, progressive rock and krautrock
We both know that you're far too pathetic to actually define these terms within your own parameters, so you're welcome to cite literally any person in the history of the world doing so. Remember: musical traits only, and they must be distinct from each other.

>I'm saying that art music is the only real type of music that uses genre in the way you describe.
How so?
>This has been demonstrated many times over.
Like what?
>We both know that you're far too pathetic to actually define these terms within your own parameters

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-rock#Characteristics
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_rock#Definition_and_characteristics
Wow that was easy.

>How so?
In the exact way you described.
>Like what?
Like this:
>The post-rock sound incorporates characteristics from a variety of musical genres, including krautrock, ambient,[13] psychedelia,[13] prog rock, space rock, math rock, tape music, minimalist classical, British IDM, jazz (both avant-garde and cool), and dub reggae,[3] as well as post-punk, free jazz, contemporary classical, and avant-garde electronica.[14]
Whoops ! Looks like someone forgot that influence isn't a musical trait !
>The first is progressive rock as it is generally understood, while the second usage refers to groups who rejected psychedelia and the hippie counterculture in favour of a modernist, avant-garde approach
Whoops ! Looks like someone forgot that "modernist" and "avant-garde" are not music traits !

You're welcome to keep trying.

>In the exact way you described.
Explain. Or are you too pathetic to actually define these terms within your own parameters?
>Like this:
You mean influences? Not what we are taking about. Nice midsection.
>Whoops ! Looks like someone forgot that influence isn't a musical trait !
Why not? Of course it can be
>Whoops ! Looks like someone forgot that "modernist" and "avant-garde" are not music traits !
read it again. Maybe you'll get it.

>Explain.
You gave parameters that fit the way which art music uses genre labels. I don't understand why you are getting a wedgie over being right (within a single context).
> Or are you too pathetic to actually define these terms within your own parameters?
You misread the post again. I said that your definition for genre does indeed apply within art music. I already explained the case in which it definitely does not fit, which is popular music genres.
>You mean influences? Not what we are taking about. Nice midsection.
This is nonsensical. Do you need sleep ? Is English your first language ?
>Why not? Of course it can be
Incorrect. "Influence" is as much a musical trait as "feel." I can say that my music is influenced by something while having no musical traits in common. Try again.
>read it again. Maybe you'll get it.
Nope ! Still wrong.

You are welcome to keep trying.

ffs how sad does your life have to be that you're picking apart people's posts by the sentence so you can get a 5 second feeling of superiority you namefag

>You gave parameters that fit the way which art music uses genre labels
Quote me where I did this
>I said that your definition for genre does indeed apply within art music
Oh I understand, you misconstrued what I said so you could further your argument. I understand why you'd be confused.
>This is nonsensical
Well, let's have a thought experiment! Let's assume I start a band, and our main influences are Nirvana and Soundgarden. It's reasonable to assume that we'd sound like a Grunge (which is a musical genre btw) band. Ergo, influences can dictate genre.
>Nope ! Still wrong.
So you missed the word "approach"? Try again, then you might understand.

From personal experience, I've found that some albums open up after more than 2 listens.

>Quote me where I did this
See >genre is defined by musical characteristics
This is true within genres of art music, such as string quartet.
>Oh I understand, you misconstrued what I said so you could further your argument
Nope. Word for word what you said.
>It's reasonable to assume
>assume
Nope.
>So you missed the word "approach"?
Not relevant.

You are welcome to keep trying.

>See (You)
Not seeing where I mentioned any specific characteristics of art music. Try again?
>Nope. Word for word what you said.
It cannot be because I specifically said musical genre and Tagg's Triage are separate entities. So as you can see you made a strawman by applying logic from one into the other, going against my argument.
>Nope.
Not an argument
>Not relevant.
Whoops ! I think I caught you in another strawman, and I think you know I did.

>You are welcome to keep trying.
What's the point of this?

> I've only been regularly visiting this board for about a week
figures

was is das

But the appeal of artists like Radiohead and artists like Britney Spears or Justin Timberlake is pretty different, and so are their musical stylings, fanbases, and importance to different genres of music. It's pretty reductive to call something "pop music" just because it sold well. Are Metallica and Led Zeppelin pop music too?

Overrated album. All they did was ripping off krautrock bands.

What krautorck band sounds like How To Disappear Completely?

It's got its good moments, National Anthem is good lifting music, HTDC and Kid A are pretty mellow, beautiful tunes, synth line in Idioteque is eerie and cerebral but they didn't even make it lmao, but overall its just a weak IDM album, shame cus with OK Computer they made their own sound and its a 1000x better album with 1000x better individual songs.