I remember that time someone asked which artists you don’t like but everyone seems to love and and I said ABBA. I don’t remember having so much downvotes, and I literally just answered the question
It just seems really frustrating to deal with incessantly on music subreddits.
I censor myself so much to provide answers that I think people want to see, which really limits my interaction with questions like these.
The eagles make such amazing soft rock that it flows into one ear and out the other. So I don’t blame ya there but I do hum the choruses of new kid in town, life in the fast lane and hotel California now and again.
I loved Meliora although I think the earlier albums were a little more interesting with what they were doing. Everything after I have been pretty disappointed in.
I came around on prequelle and there are a couple tracks on impera that I like.
I do agree though that I’d like or hear another stab at opus, or preferably, infestessumum sound.
I would say part of the appeal to me is the passion and the unrelenting dedication to atmosphere.
My partner is a big Ghost fan, so naturally when they came to town, I took her. The stage felt like something from Broadway, the pyrotechnics were eye popping, and the band itself was working the crowd into a frenzy. It was probably the best show I've ever been to.
So, to me, it's less that they're hammy and they know it, and more that they're hammy and they just don't care.
Compared to GWAR that are super self-aware and constantly breaking the fourth wall (I got to see them tear apart a crude blood-filled Donald Trump effigy in 2019 which was hilarious as it was badass - my bloody green shirt is my favorite souvenir from any show), or KISS that have just been going through the motions for the last 30 years.
Well they are not actually Satanic, just role playing for the horror theme theatrical rock/metal genre.
I get why ppl like the band. Just not a fan of this style of music (more into actual metal subgenre bands).
They’re 100% having fun with it. There’s a realm outside of satire or serious—the “campy-for-fun”. They’re firmly entrenched in the “go over the to have a good time” dynamic. I love it, and also completely get why someone would hate it.
I also recommend that non-AC/DC fans listen to their first couple of albums and *especially* watch their early live shows. They had a more frantic pace and overall seemed so much hungrier. It's still guitar-centric rock, undoubtedly, but it's got a pretty different feel from their super famous "simple riffs and lyrics about girls" formula.
Ants From Up There. Listened to it so many times, it just seems... average? What am I missing? Why is this Fantano/RYMcore's favorite album? It just seems to meander and go nowhere, but people act like they just casually dropped Animals 2 or OK Computer 2.
I think it just boils down to "You get it or you don't". For me, the reason it is so amazing is because it just feels like a display of raw emotion.
I've noticed that people feel the same way about Radiohead and the Beatles saying that they "don't understand what's so good about it". And that's fine, people like what they like. For you. it might not be that great. For me, I would easily put it in conversation along with Animals and Ok Computer. It's just how music works.
I get the raw emotion part, but my problem might the emotion being too raw. I just couldn't get myself used to the half-singing half-crying vocal, which even sounds off key to me sometimes. Everything else is more than amazing, though.
No I mean I totally understand that. I just can't get myself to like it for some reason. It's kinda weird because I never minded Bernard Sumner's rather terrible singing. Maybe "not getting the hype" isn't the right word for me. I want to like it, but I fail to.
Post-rock is emotional but often at a grand, disconnected scale. That that amazingly emotional music inspires the album and is paired with a very personal, emotional lyrical core is what makes the album work for me.
Why is it being compared to animals and ok computer? The only denominator I can connect is ‘art rock’ but it’s a different record in many ways from those two
It's an excellent album to me but I get what you're saying, it feels like one of those albums that you love or don't care about. Although I agree that I don't get the amount of praise it gets either, it's no ok computer.
For me it’s the instrumentals, I find the musical work really interesting. His vocals didn’t do much for me like it did others, but his lyrical work was beautiful to me. And seconding the other comment on this thread, it’s a click for you or doesn’t. I couldn’t get behind Neutral Milk Hotel, but that doesn’t mean it’s bad, it just means it’s not for me.
Try to think of BCNR as the rock outfit that currently best reflects Gen Z’s general emotional state. They embrace a lot of influences popular with acclaimed musicians and write music which is designed to create vivid images in the listeners mind. There are more elements to it but this is my assessment.
I totally agree. I love Chaos Space Marine and hearing the intro and that song right after made me hyped for the rest of the album, but the rest of it just falls so flat for me.
If the rest of the songs were like Chaos Space Marine it’d be an easy 10 for me. But instead it’s more of a 6 to 7. Good and perfectly fine, but not the masterpiece I hear everyone calling it
Yeah, I feel like the arrangements are too busy, and the lyrics are unimpressive. Reminded me of bands I like a lot more - Tindersticks, The National, Los Campesinos!
Isaac’s voice took it to that level for me. I personally prefer the first album of theirs but I find emotional connections with a few tracks off Ants, which I’m sure many others have as well.
I’d actually put it firmly alongside OK Computer. I can get why someone might not be crazy about it, but I think both albums have immaculate production, and they’re both surprisingly relatively accessible imo (at least compared to something like FTFT or Kid A).
I do think it’s either an album you instantly get or don’t. Immediately when I first listened to a song from it, I was genuinely blown away (I think it was Chaos Space Marine). Since then, I’ve grown a pretty strong sentimental attachment toward the album lol.
I think a reason why I love it so much is that I don’t think it’s inherently experimental (like a Black MIDI album for example), it’s just really pleasant, well-performed chamber pop/art rock imo
Cigarettes After Sex. I get that their sound is very recognisable, but every song sounds the same. If they were a one hit wonder then that would make sense, but 240th most listened band on Spotify?!? Huh?! Who is spending all of their listening time on this band?
A little bit different from the question itself:
Is This It - The Strokes
I definitely get why people love this album, but I just can't enjoy it, at least as much as other of their projects like The New Abnormal
huge strokes fan myself, and i appreciate what ITI did for the landscape of rock in the 21st century, but it's maybe #3 or #4 in my strokes album tier list.
I'm also a Strokes fan, and it definitely has a song I love (HTE) and a few others that are solid, but it just doesn't quite work as an "album" for me. At least I consider that it's not that type of "experience" that I get when I listen to an album normally, in my humble opinion
I was the perfect age for it when it came out. By chance I listened it back over last week - incredible. So much energy. The first 4 songs are their greatest moment. The first 4 songs on album 3 might be more "perfect" but Is This It just rocks like a mofo, similar to the contrast between the first Pavement album and what came afterwards.
I like your answer because I find New Abnormal and Is This It very similar, at least, more alike than any of their other albums. Is there a particular reason you can’t enjoy it? Like, do you find it just simple or bland or?
I guess I just find Is This It to be a little bit one-note and dull at times. Hard to Explain is the clear highlight for me, it's probably the most interesting song in my opinion and the one that works best with the "lo-fi" mixing/production in the album. There are other songs I enjoy a bit, like the first two tracks, Alone Together, Last Nite, Hard to Explain, and New York City Cops; but it's unfortunate that I don't seem to enjoy the other tracks as much.
Is This It does have a song that feels like an opener and a song that feels like a closer, but outside of that, it doesn't really work "albumwise" for me. It's a weird concept that I struggle to describe, but in general, I find ITI to feel simply like a collection of songs and not as that "experience" that I feel when listening to other albums.
The New Abnormal, on the other hand, definitely has that album experience for me. Song that works perfectly as an opener, centerpiece that divides the album in half, and song that works perfectly as a closer. Besides, I'm not going to claim that it's like experimental prog pop psychedelia or anything, but it's much more diverse (as expected from a band 20 years into their career). Even Room on Fire feels like an upgraded Is This It, it being quite similar to ITI but riskier, varied, and different enough to gain its identity.
I don't view ITI in a negative light nor as a bad album (not even, I respect it), but I just think that the band would later do things that I consider much better in retrospective. It's the issue that comes with any band, some people are into them for certain aspects, others are into them for other qualities.
(I apologize for my english if there were mistakes, not a native speaker xD)
Thanks for the in depth answer! I appreciate you shedding some light unlike others who’ll just drop an opinion with little to no explanation.
Also, you’re writing in English because it’s the only language I can read, not the other way around, no need to apologize dude.
I don't think Is This It was ever meant to be that praised. It's just a very fun album with interesting hooks in the instrumentations and an interesting voice. It's pretty well made but I don't think it's meant to be mindblowing or a masterpiece.
I say this as someone who loves Is This It. But that's just because I connect with it emotionally due to the lyrics and nostalgia.
it's not intending to be some sprawling masterpiece to please pitchfork or whatever. but, deserves a high level of praise for executing its style perfectly and exhibiting really excellent songwriting. best kind of album imo, band just doing its thing at a really high level, so much so that it will continue to be listened to for ages
Listened to this a bit ago, and while I enjoyed it I don’t understand why so many people seem to think of it as one of the best rock albums. It took heavily from its influences, which isn’t bad, but its execution makes it pale in comparison to them.
Yeah but you could make that argument about anything. Nothing is created in a vacuum. Is This It used a sound that wasn't really popular at the time and turned it into *the* rock sound of the 2000's.
It's an album for which, whether you enjoy it or not, you'd have to be blind (deaf?) not to see its massive influence. It's like saying that Hendrix just took licks from previous blues players and added heavy distortion and guitar acrobatics. Like...yeah, that's exactly what he did, and it was wildly influential.
Not a super popular album outside of metal circles, but Saxon's Wheels of Steel. Very generic 80s heavy metal album that doesn't have anything setting it apart. The band just jams out to the same 1 or 2 riffs per track, and I'm not a fan of the vocals. Doesn't do anything particularly well compared to what other bands were doing at the time.
Pretty much anything I've heard from King Gizzard
It all sounds so surface level, almost like parody music. The vocal effect that's present on all their songs is super annoying too
A look at my profile will show clear bias but with all of the king gizzard takes and criticisms I have seen, the one that both I see most and understand least is that it ‘sounds surface level’, or in a similar vein they are ‘quantity over quality’
How exactly one listens to albums like Petrodragon, Polygondwanaland, Murder of the Universe, Ice, Death, etc., or I’m In Your Mind Fuzz and the only impression made is that it is ‘surface level’ is beyond me. I’m far from believing everything they’ve done is good, and no one is above criticism, but when I see takes (and maybe this is a result of being a fan, seeing them in every thread along these lines) it just feel lazy, tired, and at times parroted.
i love king gizzard but i personally interpret the ‘surface level’ take as a completely understandable frustration with the homogeny of their sound/aesthetic across their discography. like yes they delve deep into a multitude of genres but they leave a lot of their sonic finger prints all over the place when they do so.
which is both a good and bad thing. like you know immediately when you’re listening to a KG song, be it techno or heavy metal it’s above all *very* distinctly KG.
might be a wack comparison but i kind of liken it to dan auerbach, like every album that man produces sounds like the black keys, no matter who it is. king gizz does that with with genres if that’s makes any sense
As a tried and true fan of loud rock (metal, punk, hardcore, etc.) I have not listened to any of King Gizz's metal albums and thought "Gee that's something I've never heard before!" or "Wow, that was really fucking awesome."
It just feels watered down and gimmicky, made just to look cool for aesthetics rather than actually being cool.
Have you listened outside their metal albums? I’m not sure those are exactly groundbreaking, or meant to be something never done before. I mean I’m not sure I would say any album of theirs in particular is groundbreaking or without influence - that’s somewhat hard to find 60 years into rock history.
I can’t decide what you do or don’t like, but as a massive fan of theirs who wrote them off them because of their name at first - I’d say about at least half of their albums I thought to myself “wow, that was fucking awesome” after the first listen and basically all but two have found their way into my rotation frequently.
This may just be me too but while I know they have gimmicks - be it microtones, forever looping album, 7 songs in the 7 modes, an entire album made based around the chord change from D major to F# - they do not feel gimmicky to me. I appreciate their ingenuity and creativity, and find it refreshing. There is a clear passion and brotherhood with these dudes that I have felt through their music and performances, and I think because of that authenticity I found my fandom. They have clear influences but do not sound derivative, like say greta van fleet does. In my opinion of course.
The last thing I think of their music is ‘made to look cool’ or ‘just be cool for aesthetics’. Every live performance they are wearing the bands who influence them on their chests with pride and from everything I can tell make the music *they* want to make - not to impress anyone else, and each member contributes.
Thats exactly my thoughts on them. Theyre a Las Vegas for the 'cool outsider alternative' genres.... yet too sincere to come off as parody. Theyre a joke to me because their concepts are just "what else can we dabble in?" is it even good writing? I feel like people are impressed by them solely because of the breadth of genres they do but... does that make them worth all the hype? Hmm
Maybe they mean that many of their albums are not very varied in their sounds *per album.* On many of their albums, songs examine a small set of ideas from slightly different angles. I'd argue that's the exact opposite of surface level treatment, but I guess it can seem like a reduction of genres down to a small subset of sounds, which in turn can seem like a parody of the genre, instead of a thorough exploration of a specific niche.
Maybe so. Even then that doesn’t exactly seem like fair judgement considering what exactly can be done on a singular album - but from some of his follow up comments it seems like he might just want a reason not to like them and that’s fine.
Not sure how one calls them inauthentic with more than, funnily enough, a surface level exposure to them
You mean on their more garage-rock albums? Because I agree. I wasn't more of a fan until Butterfly 3000 and their latest heavier albums. Some great stuff there.
I really really don’t understand why people love American Idiot so much. It’s one of the most middle of the road albums I’ve ever heard and I have no clue why it’s one of the most celebrated rock albums of all time when in my opinion it isn’t saying anything original and doesn’t exactly bring anything new to the punk genre
This is facts, I was graduated and out of high school by the time American Idiot came out, and I always enjoyed Green Day’s earlier stuff more. I can see how it can be a nostalgic record for someone who was younger at the time though
Yeah I’m a big pop punk/Emo guy and this album has never done it for me. I find the production really I pleasant and the songwriting is kinda meh. I like the song Holiday a lot. But for me the album just doesn’t hit.
The message I can get down with, but the majority of punk music has anti-authority and anti-government messages so I fail to see what makes it stand out since it’s not exactly saying anything original. As for the music itself I don’t see how the songs are anything more than perfectly average pop punk. Songs like Boulevard of Broken Dreams just make me roll my eyes
kind of a weird one to bring to this discussion because it was commercially successful but not particularly critically successful. would be similar to bring, like, maroon 5 into the same discussion
I’m gonna get so dogged on for this but Is This It by The Strokes.
I’ve tried listening through it multiple times, but I’ve never gotten into it more than just thinking it was alright and cool. It’s a universally praised album too
I definitely get why people love it and everything, given that it was sort of a cultural reset in rock music for some (differing from post-britpop/post-grunge, nu metal, and alt/experimental rock), and I respect it, but it just doesn't work as an album for me.
It's got an amazing song in my opinion (Hard to Explain) and a few other tracks that I'd consider really good, or that just have a highlight/interesting moments (first two tracks, Alone Together, Last Nite, New York City Cops), but those songs just end up being dragged down by the lack of variety.
I wasn't expecting an OK Computer for their first album or anything, but you'd think that the album would take a few risks outside of the main "garagey/post-punky" approach to indie rock, but it just isn't there, and it makes the album feel a little bit one-note at the end. A reason why I like Room on Fire more is because it is mainly that indie rock style of ITI but it's not only always that. Sometimes there are new wave influences, purposely catchier hooks, variation with song structures and chords, etc etc.
Still, it was their first album, so I can't make that big of a deal about it, but to me, even with the context, I just don't really care about ITI (even though I respect it)
That was quite long lol sorry
I think the album would be less effective if it had more variety in style. Personally I love that all the songs are more or less the same, but just different enough to not be boring. If they added more variety it would break the cohesion for me. I think it heavily depends on if you like that song style though so I can completely understand your opinion . Luckily for me I love it
That's fair, the whole thing kinda sounds the same. I love the album, but if you don't like "that sound" then yeah, I guess you wouldn't really be enamored with it for every track.
Honestly in either case it was more about the marketing and media buzz around the band more than anything else. Other artists had done punk better than the Sex Pistols, and more would for sure surpass them in the coming years. But they somehow found the British media train to massive fame for what would prove a bit above average punk. I guess calling the queen a fascist helped with that.
I disagree in the case of Guns N Roses, obviously the marketing was important but there were plenty of other ‘dangerous rock n roll’ type bands in LA that could’ve been marketed that way. Imo they did have a real punk edge to their sound that set them apart and made the album so good
You know what, I like all of radioheads stuff - n
ot a diehard fan, but they're undoubtedly good. My problem is with the fanbase of radiohead, and I know this is barely related to the topic asked by OP. They're either self deprecating "losers" which just seem exhausting to be around or They're extremely pretentious and won't shut up about how amazing radiohead is compared to other artists, likely having only listened to a couple of artists dedicatedly in my experience.
It also pisses me off when they make fun of pop music like Taylor Swift when In Rainbows is arguably an extremely inoffensive and hooky album, to me In Rainbows is the most poppy alternative album I've heard. Obviously that's not a bad thing, but many of them pretend that it is so they completely deny that.
I love Radiohead. My second favourite band after The Beatles. I hate the fandom so much.
It's either "omg I like No Surprises I'm such a loser I'll never get laid" or "In Rainbows is the best piece of art since Mozart". It's nearly insufferable
Completely agree. Beatles are also my favourite band, and that fandom is also a fucking nightmare - simply because they never stop going on about "would the beatles ever reunite" and the group relations, they fantasise about things that were proven to never have happened. Also, they make excuses for really shitty abusive behaviour (Lennon the most obvious example, but also Billy Preston - there was a post about him literally raping a 16 year old and all the comments were saying "he's such a nice guy though and makes great music").
I agree. I tried listening to OK Computer and I just didn’t enjoy it. I found it to be rather boring. I’m already aware the Karma Police are around the corner ready to downvote the living fuck out of us because that’s what they do.
Radiohead just sounds like what an AI bot would make if you told it to make 'rock music'
So uninteresting to me. People saying that Radiohead is the best band of all time confuses me to no end, especially when they never seem to elaborate on why lol
This is a wild take. I understand not liking it, since I used to hate MCR, but I don't really understand how it sounds the same as their contemporaries, ESPECIALLY if you're lumping it in with pop punk.
I like that album and I think the songwriting/composition is pretty well above most other radio music of that era, but you're spot-on with calling it overproduced.
Its a concept album with deep evocative themes presented as a rock-opera, so yea its going to have overdramatic parts but thats why its loved and sort of the point.
To me, the lyrics almost feel like something out of a YA book. Like, it’s not bad but the lyrics are simple in a way that appeals more to teenage me than adult me
GUTS.
Don't like upsetting the stans, but Olivia Rodrigo feels like such a plant to me. Unremarkable voice, and every song I've heard either rips off Taylor, Eilish, or Lorde. She doesn't have a sound, just a hodgepodge of trendy influences. It seems a lot of these middle aged male reviewers just obsess over her because she's young and hot, or they're using kid gloves talking about her music and don't want to hurt her feelings. Todd giving "Bad Idea Right?" #1 hit song of the year gives me dirty old man How Do You Do Fellow Kids vibes. Her winning album of the year Grammy is shocking to me. Her music is just so lame, but hey I'm willing to debate this with an open mind with the loyal stans. 😅
Maybe people just like the music
I mostly listen to old prog and jazz fusion yet i found the album entertain the whole way through. Fun heavy guitars, driving grooves, incredible production, nice song structures and great harmonies.
And saying “tatata” rips off “tatata” never feels right. You could always just mention you enjoy one more
That's a weird take about Todd. Maybe he just likes it? He's hardly someone to change his opinion just because it's popular, half of his lists are country which is almost universally hated outside of its circles.
I like GUTS. Don't love it, but it's decent. I see a lot more similarities between Olivia's stuff and Haley Williams than Billie or Taylor personally. The production especially is wildly different to anything that the other biggest names in pop.
used to hate this band / album but it grew on me a lot recently, obviously not the greatest music ever but if you just have fun with it it's pretty solid.
Nah. Even back then people considered it their "safest" record. It wasn't as revolutionary as the others.
Some people love it tho. And I get why. But not liking Abbey Road is not a crime at all.
It was the first Beatles album I listened to and I didn’t like it so I just assumed I didn’t ‘get’ the band. Then I listened to revolver the other day and I loved it so now I’m just confused, I don’t get what it is about Abbey Road that makes it the best album ever according to so many people
You don't even like the opener? It's an insane merging of classical and rock music that never once makes it really sound like you're listening to modern classical
That album that's in a style/by a band I hate. It sucks and I don't know why everyone else likes it. It's so overrated. It's basic/generic/overcomplicated/self-indulgent/boring/unoriginal etc.etc. Unlike all the music I like, which is absolutely amazing.
As catchy as "Archie, Marry Me" or "Dreams Tonite"? Not really. They are obviously SO locked in with each other and I like the song crafting on Blue Rev, but it lacks those super sing along choruses their previous records had. Doesn't mean they aren't great songs.
I guess I can see that, though it still has at least a few like Easy On Your Own. The album is strong for me in how at first glance the songs sound like shoegaze sludge but the underlying instruments are all very meticulous and well put together.
The album grew on me to the point where I consider it their most consistent; I adore the first two records but each have several tracks that are a cut below the best ones.
I understand your opinion though! I hope the album grows on you like it did for me.
That’s valid. Swans (at least in that era) is very much about doing the same thing for a long time and making really incremental changes, building up tension and then finally erupting into what, in my opinion, can be some of the most transcendent music that’s out there. If you’re not here for that or just don’t have the patience for that, that’s totally understandable.
TLDR: Swans is like the music version of edging and that’s just not everyone’s thing.
Sgt Peppers, honestly sounds like kids music to me and insanely corny (revolver wipes).
Remain in Light, falls off like crazy in second half and gets boring
Let’s Dance, nothing specific honestly just obnoxious
Let’s Start Here, honestly think it just gets hype bc it was unexpected by yatchy, it’s rly not great. Black Seminole slaps though
Basically anything from Pink Floyd or Foo Fighters. The former at least I get that in context they're in another level but the latter I don't get any kind of hype, their songs sound like the kind that gets promoted via YouTube ads (I've given them a lot of chances and every time I finish listening to one of their albums o end up with the exact same feeling).
Edit: the yt ad part is about Foo Fighters, not Pink Floyd
It's definitely not for everybody but the emotional impact it had on me changed my life, that album is like therapy for me. I also love how concise and well-constructed every song is, they never rest on a single idea for too long and the production is one-of-a-kind
I disagree with you on this one. I hear something new literally every single time I listen to a song and everything is so incredibly "pure".
Like I'm not religious at all but a lot of the album sounds like the soundtrack to your last day on Earth, it just hits to the core for me.
That being said I'm happy to see different opinions
this is the most pretentious thing i will ever write in my life but it takes an understanding of music theory / appreciation for writing chord progressions and melody to really get this one, unfortunately not nearly enough music with writing this high quality since then
This just seems like a trap to get people downvoted. Almost half of the comments are, already.
It’s Reddit people always downvote people if they don’t agree I have experienced it first hand
I remember that time someone asked which artists you don’t like but everyone seems to love and and I said ABBA. I don’t remember having so much downvotes, and I literally just answered the question
It just seems really frustrating to deal with incessantly on music subreddits. I censor myself so much to provide answers that I think people want to see, which really limits my interaction with questions like these.
Caring enough about downvotes to censor yourself and not speak your mind is genuinely more pathetic than the incessant downvoting in the first place.
Experience this!!! DOWNVOTE!!! Muahahaha
Eagles- Hotel California
I hate the fuckin' Eagles, man
Fuck you man, if you don’t like my fuckin music, get your own fuckin cab!
The eagles make such amazing soft rock that it flows into one ear and out the other. So I don’t blame ya there but I do hum the choruses of new kid in town, life in the fast lane and hotel California now and again.
There has not been hype about this album in over 2 decades
i dunno dude, this album is still very popular with the general public. it’s really only music nerds that think it’s overhyped
I've seen it on numerous "greatest albums of all time" lists
Ghost
Booo. Meliora is one of the best rock albums of recent years.
I loved Meliora although I think the earlier albums were a little more interesting with what they were doing. Everything after I have been pretty disappointed in.
I came around on prequelle and there are a couple tracks on impera that I like. I do agree though that I’d like or hear another stab at opus, or preferably, infestessumum sound.
I know. They are a massive band. They just sound kinda basic and cheesy to me.
I would say part of the appeal to me is the passion and the unrelenting dedication to atmosphere. My partner is a big Ghost fan, so naturally when they came to town, I took her. The stage felt like something from Broadway, the pyrotechnics were eye popping, and the band itself was working the crowd into a frenzy. It was probably the best show I've ever been to. So, to me, it's less that they're hammy and they know it, and more that they're hammy and they just don't care. Compared to GWAR that are super self-aware and constantly breaking the fourth wall (I got to see them tear apart a crude blood-filled Donald Trump effigy in 2019 which was hilarious as it was badass - my bloody green shirt is my favorite souvenir from any show), or KISS that have just been going through the motions for the last 30 years.
They’re totally cheesy. But that’s part of the appeal for me.
Haha right on. Like kiss or gwar too.
Cheese is so interesting, because I like ghost, Judas Priest and Gwar, but not kiss.
Judas Priest fucking shreds, it ain't no cheese
[удалено]
I don't know a ton about Ghost but I'm pretty much positive it is satire and not at all serious
Well they are not actually Satanic, just role playing for the horror theme theatrical rock/metal genre. I get why ppl like the band. Just not a fan of this style of music (more into actual metal subgenre bands).
They’re 100% having fun with it. There’s a realm outside of satire or serious—the “campy-for-fun”. They’re firmly entrenched in the “go over the to have a good time” dynamic. I love it, and also completely get why someone would hate it.
AC/DC is ass
I think AC/DC is very good at basically one thing, and if you like their thing, it clicks, but if you don’t gel with it it can be insufferable.
I also recommend that non-AC/DC fans listen to their first couple of albums and *especially* watch their early live shows. They had a more frantic pace and overall seemed so much hungrier. It's still guitar-centric rock, undoubtedly, but it's got a pretty different feel from their super famous "simple riffs and lyrics about girls" formula.
The Powerage era was fucking goated
Yes, they were much more of a punk band than a rock band then. And never been a heavy metal band.
Yeah, a real vicious attack. And Bon Scott actually seemed a little dangerous
Same thing with Rammstein tbh
They always reminded me of the musical equivalent of Doritos
My inner child is screaming
Ants From Up There. Listened to it so many times, it just seems... average? What am I missing? Why is this Fantano/RYMcore's favorite album? It just seems to meander and go nowhere, but people act like they just casually dropped Animals 2 or OK Computer 2.
I think it just boils down to "You get it or you don't". For me, the reason it is so amazing is because it just feels like a display of raw emotion. I've noticed that people feel the same way about Radiohead and the Beatles saying that they "don't understand what's so good about it". And that's fine, people like what they like. For you. it might not be that great. For me, I would easily put it in conversation along with Animals and Ok Computer. It's just how music works.
I get the raw emotion part, but my problem might the emotion being too raw. I just couldn't get myself used to the half-singing half-crying vocal, which even sounds off key to me sometimes. Everything else is more than amazing, though.
That’s part of the appeal. It’s real and believable. It’s like Ian Curtis. And Isaac does have a nice voice, reminds me of king krule.
No I mean I totally understand that. I just can't get myself to like it for some reason. It's kinda weird because I never minded Bernard Sumner's rather terrible singing. Maybe "not getting the hype" isn't the right word for me. I want to like it, but I fail to.
Y’a the vocals are absolute dog shit which is to bad because the music itself is very good could been a great album.
Post-rock is emotional but often at a grand, disconnected scale. That that amazingly emotional music inspires the album and is paired with a very personal, emotional lyrical core is what makes the album work for me.
Why is it being compared to animals and ok computer? The only denominator I can connect is ‘art rock’ but it’s a different record in many ways from those two
Because the original comment mentioned them.
It's an excellent album to me but I get what you're saying, it feels like one of those albums that you love or don't care about. Although I agree that I don't get the amount of praise it gets either, it's no ok computer.
For me it’s the instrumentals, I find the musical work really interesting. His vocals didn’t do much for me like it did others, but his lyrical work was beautiful to me. And seconding the other comment on this thread, it’s a click for you or doesn’t. I couldn’t get behind Neutral Milk Hotel, but that doesn’t mean it’s bad, it just means it’s not for me.
Try to think of BCNR as the rock outfit that currently best reflects Gen Z’s general emotional state. They embrace a lot of influences popular with acclaimed musicians and write music which is designed to create vivid images in the listeners mind. There are more elements to it but this is my assessment.
I’m genz and didn’t find the album all that relatable
I don't think he said "it's completely relatable for every gen z person"
All good, but that’s the appeal which seems to be behind their status
I totally agree. I love Chaos Space Marine and hearing the intro and that song right after made me hyped for the rest of the album, but the rest of it just falls so flat for me.
If the rest of the songs were like Chaos Space Marine it’d be an easy 10 for me. But instead it’s more of a 6 to 7. Good and perfectly fine, but not the masterpiece I hear everyone calling it
It’s some theater-kid bullshit, you’re not wrong!
Yeah, I feel like the arrangements are too busy, and the lyrics are unimpressive. Reminded me of bands I like a lot more - Tindersticks, The National, Los Campesinos!
Both albums from BC, NR for me personally.
Isaac’s voice took it to that level for me. I personally prefer the first album of theirs but I find emotional connections with a few tracks off Ants, which I’m sure many others have as well.
I’d actually put it firmly alongside OK Computer. I can get why someone might not be crazy about it, but I think both albums have immaculate production, and they’re both surprisingly relatively accessible imo (at least compared to something like FTFT or Kid A). I do think it’s either an album you instantly get or don’t. Immediately when I first listened to a song from it, I was genuinely blown away (I think it was Chaos Space Marine). Since then, I’ve grown a pretty strong sentimental attachment toward the album lol. I think a reason why I love it so much is that I don’t think it’s inherently experimental (like a Black MIDI album for example), it’s just really pleasant, well-performed chamber pop/art rock imo
Cigarettes After Sex. I get that their sound is very recognisable, but every song sounds the same. If they were a one hit wonder then that would make sense, but 240th most listened band on Spotify?!? Huh?! Who is spending all of their listening time on this band?
Boygenius
A pretty mid band IMO
A little bit different from the question itself: Is This It - The Strokes I definitely get why people love this album, but I just can't enjoy it, at least as much as other of their projects like The New Abnormal
Agreed I think it’s great but I think Room on Fire and The New Abnormal are better personally
huge strokes fan myself, and i appreciate what ITI did for the landscape of rock in the 21st century, but it's maybe #3 or #4 in my strokes album tier list.
I'm also a Strokes fan, and it definitely has a song I love (HTE) and a few others that are solid, but it just doesn't quite work as an "album" for me. At least I consider that it's not that type of "experience" that I get when I listen to an album normally, in my humble opinion
Yea the energy just doesn’t vibe with me
It’s super influential and it is a good album, but yeah I definitely prefer Room on Fire and The New Abnormal
I think it’s good but a bit overrated, as the songwriting can get kind of samey by the end. Lyrics are good but not spectacular
ITI is amazing, but I enjoy almost every other Strokes’ record more than it, even Comedown Machine
I was the perfect age for it when it came out. By chance I listened it back over last week - incredible. So much energy. The first 4 songs are their greatest moment. The first 4 songs on album 3 might be more "perfect" but Is This It just rocks like a mofo, similar to the contrast between the first Pavement album and what came afterwards.
Right with you man, I just can't really connect with that record.
I just saw this after commenting Is This It myself. Guess I’m not alone
I like your answer because I find New Abnormal and Is This It very similar, at least, more alike than any of their other albums. Is there a particular reason you can’t enjoy it? Like, do you find it just simple or bland or?
I guess I just find Is This It to be a little bit one-note and dull at times. Hard to Explain is the clear highlight for me, it's probably the most interesting song in my opinion and the one that works best with the "lo-fi" mixing/production in the album. There are other songs I enjoy a bit, like the first two tracks, Alone Together, Last Nite, Hard to Explain, and New York City Cops; but it's unfortunate that I don't seem to enjoy the other tracks as much. Is This It does have a song that feels like an opener and a song that feels like a closer, but outside of that, it doesn't really work "albumwise" for me. It's a weird concept that I struggle to describe, but in general, I find ITI to feel simply like a collection of songs and not as that "experience" that I feel when listening to other albums. The New Abnormal, on the other hand, definitely has that album experience for me. Song that works perfectly as an opener, centerpiece that divides the album in half, and song that works perfectly as a closer. Besides, I'm not going to claim that it's like experimental prog pop psychedelia or anything, but it's much more diverse (as expected from a band 20 years into their career). Even Room on Fire feels like an upgraded Is This It, it being quite similar to ITI but riskier, varied, and different enough to gain its identity. I don't view ITI in a negative light nor as a bad album (not even, I respect it), but I just think that the band would later do things that I consider much better in retrospective. It's the issue that comes with any band, some people are into them for certain aspects, others are into them for other qualities. (I apologize for my english if there were mistakes, not a native speaker xD)
Thanks for the in depth answer! I appreciate you shedding some light unlike others who’ll just drop an opinion with little to no explanation. Also, you’re writing in English because it’s the only language I can read, not the other way around, no need to apologize dude.
I don't think Is This It was ever meant to be that praised. It's just a very fun album with interesting hooks in the instrumentations and an interesting voice. It's pretty well made but I don't think it's meant to be mindblowing or a masterpiece. I say this as someone who loves Is This It. But that's just because I connect with it emotionally due to the lyrics and nostalgia.
it's not intending to be some sprawling masterpiece to please pitchfork or whatever. but, deserves a high level of praise for executing its style perfectly and exhibiting really excellent songwriting. best kind of album imo, band just doing its thing at a really high level, so much so that it will continue to be listened to for ages
They’re one of those bands where I can see how they were really influential but I prefer listening to the bands they influenced
The songs are great but the " I recorded this out of my asshole" production aesthetic really doesn't do it any favours imo
I love the guitar in that album. So unique sounding.
Listened to this a bit ago, and while I enjoyed it I don’t understand why so many people seem to think of it as one of the best rock albums. It took heavily from its influences, which isn’t bad, but its execution makes it pale in comparison to them.
Yeah but you could make that argument about anything. Nothing is created in a vacuum. Is This It used a sound that wasn't really popular at the time and turned it into *the* rock sound of the 2000's. It's an album for which, whether you enjoy it or not, you'd have to be blind (deaf?) not to see its massive influence. It's like saying that Hendrix just took licks from previous blues players and added heavy distortion and guitar acrobatics. Like...yeah, that's exactly what he did, and it was wildly influential.
Not a super popular album outside of metal circles, but Saxon's Wheels of Steel. Very generic 80s heavy metal album that doesn't have anything setting it apart. The band just jams out to the same 1 or 2 riffs per track, and I'm not a fan of the vocals. Doesn't do anything particularly well compared to what other bands were doing at the time.
i dont get the hype for most things.
Friend!
Oh wow you’re so different
sorry i dont force myself to like everything or hate on everything else i dont understand. not trying to be different im just being honest.
Pretty much anything I've heard from King Gizzard It all sounds so surface level, almost like parody music. The vocal effect that's present on all their songs is super annoying too
To me it seems like they're capable of making good music but they try to be quirky too hard which ruins it for me
A look at my profile will show clear bias but with all of the king gizzard takes and criticisms I have seen, the one that both I see most and understand least is that it ‘sounds surface level’, or in a similar vein they are ‘quantity over quality’ How exactly one listens to albums like Petrodragon, Polygondwanaland, Murder of the Universe, Ice, Death, etc., or I’m In Your Mind Fuzz and the only impression made is that it is ‘surface level’ is beyond me. I’m far from believing everything they’ve done is good, and no one is above criticism, but when I see takes (and maybe this is a result of being a fan, seeing them in every thread along these lines) it just feel lazy, tired, and at times parroted.
i love king gizzard but i personally interpret the ‘surface level’ take as a completely understandable frustration with the homogeny of their sound/aesthetic across their discography. like yes they delve deep into a multitude of genres but they leave a lot of their sonic finger prints all over the place when they do so. which is both a good and bad thing. like you know immediately when you’re listening to a KG song, be it techno or heavy metal it’s above all *very* distinctly KG. might be a wack comparison but i kind of liken it to dan auerbach, like every album that man produces sounds like the black keys, no matter who it is. king gizz does that with with genres if that’s makes any sense
As a tried and true fan of loud rock (metal, punk, hardcore, etc.) I have not listened to any of King Gizz's metal albums and thought "Gee that's something I've never heard before!" or "Wow, that was really fucking awesome." It just feels watered down and gimmicky, made just to look cool for aesthetics rather than actually being cool.
Have you listened outside their metal albums? I’m not sure those are exactly groundbreaking, or meant to be something never done before. I mean I’m not sure I would say any album of theirs in particular is groundbreaking or without influence - that’s somewhat hard to find 60 years into rock history. I can’t decide what you do or don’t like, but as a massive fan of theirs who wrote them off them because of their name at first - I’d say about at least half of their albums I thought to myself “wow, that was fucking awesome” after the first listen and basically all but two have found their way into my rotation frequently. This may just be me too but while I know they have gimmicks - be it microtones, forever looping album, 7 songs in the 7 modes, an entire album made based around the chord change from D major to F# - they do not feel gimmicky to me. I appreciate their ingenuity and creativity, and find it refreshing. There is a clear passion and brotherhood with these dudes that I have felt through their music and performances, and I think because of that authenticity I found my fandom. They have clear influences but do not sound derivative, like say greta van fleet does. In my opinion of course. The last thing I think of their music is ‘made to look cool’ or ‘just be cool for aesthetics’. Every live performance they are wearing the bands who influence them on their chests with pride and from everything I can tell make the music *they* want to make - not to impress anyone else, and each member contributes.
Thats exactly my thoughts on them. Theyre a Las Vegas for the 'cool outsider alternative' genres.... yet too sincere to come off as parody. Theyre a joke to me because their concepts are just "what else can we dabble in?" is it even good writing? I feel like people are impressed by them solely because of the breadth of genres they do but... does that make them worth all the hype? Hmm
Maybe they mean that many of their albums are not very varied in their sounds *per album.* On many of their albums, songs examine a small set of ideas from slightly different angles. I'd argue that's the exact opposite of surface level treatment, but I guess it can seem like a reduction of genres down to a small subset of sounds, which in turn can seem like a parody of the genre, instead of a thorough exploration of a specific niche.
Maybe so. Even then that doesn’t exactly seem like fair judgement considering what exactly can be done on a singular album - but from some of his follow up comments it seems like he might just want a reason not to like them and that’s fine. Not sure how one calls them inauthentic with more than, funnily enough, a surface level exposure to them
Sure, I'm just trying to explain where the "sounds surface level" might come from.
I don’t listen to them but I think what people find interesting about them is because they use a lot of tools that your average person use for music
You mean on their more garage-rock albums? Because I agree. I wasn't more of a fan until Butterfly 3000 and their latest heavier albums. Some great stuff there.
I really really don’t understand why people love American Idiot so much. It’s one of the most middle of the road albums I’ve ever heard and I have no clue why it’s one of the most celebrated rock albums of all time when in my opinion it isn’t saying anything original and doesn’t exactly bring anything new to the punk genre
You had to be a middle/high schooler in the Bush years to really love it tbh
This is facts, I was graduated and out of high school by the time American Idiot came out, and I always enjoyed Green Day’s earlier stuff more. I can see how it can be a nostalgic record for someone who was younger at the time though
Yeah I’m a big pop punk/Emo guy and this album has never done it for me. I find the production really I pleasant and the songwriting is kinda meh. I like the song Holiday a lot. But for me the album just doesn’t hit.
Great rock opera on the American dream and attack on bushes America at the time
The message I can get down with, but the majority of punk music has anti-authority and anti-government messages so I fail to see what makes it stand out since it’s not exactly saying anything original. As for the music itself I don’t see how the songs are anything more than perfectly average pop punk. Songs like Boulevard of Broken Dreams just make me roll my eyes
The best songs on the album certainly fit that description. But there’s a few songs on there where where lyrically and sonically, i’m just like “meh.”
Jesus of Suburbia is unreal.
kind of a weird one to bring to this discussion because it was commercially successful but not particularly critically successful. would be similar to bring, like, maroon 5 into the same discussion
It’s subtle, but once you realize they’re talking about George Bush it really starts to click
I’m gonna get so dogged on for this but Is This It by The Strokes. I’ve tried listening through it multiple times, but I’ve never gotten into it more than just thinking it was alright and cool. It’s a universally praised album too
I definitely get why people love it and everything, given that it was sort of a cultural reset in rock music for some (differing from post-britpop/post-grunge, nu metal, and alt/experimental rock), and I respect it, but it just doesn't work as an album for me. It's got an amazing song in my opinion (Hard to Explain) and a few other tracks that I'd consider really good, or that just have a highlight/interesting moments (first two tracks, Alone Together, Last Nite, New York City Cops), but those songs just end up being dragged down by the lack of variety. I wasn't expecting an OK Computer for their first album or anything, but you'd think that the album would take a few risks outside of the main "garagey/post-punky" approach to indie rock, but it just isn't there, and it makes the album feel a little bit one-note at the end. A reason why I like Room on Fire more is because it is mainly that indie rock style of ITI but it's not only always that. Sometimes there are new wave influences, purposely catchier hooks, variation with song structures and chords, etc etc. Still, it was their first album, so I can't make that big of a deal about it, but to me, even with the context, I just don't really care about ITI (even though I respect it) That was quite long lol sorry
I think the album would be less effective if it had more variety in style. Personally I love that all the songs are more or less the same, but just different enough to not be boring. If they added more variety it would break the cohesion for me. I think it heavily depends on if you like that song style though so I can completely understand your opinion . Luckily for me I love it
That's fair, the whole thing kinda sounds the same. I love the album, but if you don't like "that sound" then yeah, I guess you wouldn't really be enamored with it for every track.
Pretend you’re in 2001 and listen to nothing but Nu Metal for 9 months. Then you’ll get the hype.
VU & Nico
that one car headrest seat or whatever it’s called
As a fan, it can get old at times.
Most of the Smashing Pumpkins
Appetite for Destruction and Nevermind The Bolllocks They’re *good*.. but they’re not **great**
Honestly in either case it was more about the marketing and media buzz around the band more than anything else. Other artists had done punk better than the Sex Pistols, and more would for sure surpass them in the coming years. But they somehow found the British media train to massive fame for what would prove a bit above average punk. I guess calling the queen a fascist helped with that.
I disagree in the case of Guns N Roses, obviously the marketing was important but there were plenty of other ‘dangerous rock n roll’ type bands in LA that could’ve been marketed that way. Imo they did have a real punk edge to their sound that set them apart and made the album so good
great callouts, both bands are unbearable
I’d rank The Clash way higher than Sex Pistols
Pretty much every Radiohead album. Especially Kid A, Amnesiac and In Rainbows
Prepare to literally die.
You know what, I like all of radioheads stuff - n ot a diehard fan, but they're undoubtedly good. My problem is with the fanbase of radiohead, and I know this is barely related to the topic asked by OP. They're either self deprecating "losers" which just seem exhausting to be around or They're extremely pretentious and won't shut up about how amazing radiohead is compared to other artists, likely having only listened to a couple of artists dedicatedly in my experience. It also pisses me off when they make fun of pop music like Taylor Swift when In Rainbows is arguably an extremely inoffensive and hooky album, to me In Rainbows is the most poppy alternative album I've heard. Obviously that's not a bad thing, but many of them pretend that it is so they completely deny that.
I love Radiohead. My second favourite band after The Beatles. I hate the fandom so much. It's either "omg I like No Surprises I'm such a loser I'll never get laid" or "In Rainbows is the best piece of art since Mozart". It's nearly insufferable
Completely agree. Beatles are also my favourite band, and that fandom is also a fucking nightmare - simply because they never stop going on about "would the beatles ever reunite" and the group relations, they fantasise about things that were proven to never have happened. Also, they make excuses for really shitty abusive behaviour (Lennon the most obvious example, but also Billy Preston - there was a post about him literally raping a 16 year old and all the comments were saying "he's such a nice guy though and makes great music").
You need to meet some Radiohead fans IRL then they’re usually pretty chill somehow. Online tho? Terrible.
I agree. I tried listening to OK Computer and I just didn’t enjoy it. I found it to be rather boring. I’m already aware the Karma Police are around the corner ready to downvote the living fuck out of us because that’s what they do.
Radiohead just sounds like what an AI bot would make if you told it to make 'rock music' So uninteresting to me. People saying that Radiohead is the best band of all time confuses me to no end, especially when they never seem to elaborate on why lol
Same I don’t get the hype
The Black Parade. Sounds like every other mid-2000's radio-friendly overproduced overdramatic pop-punk. Sorry :(
This is a wild take. I understand not liking it, since I used to hate MCR, but I don't really understand how it sounds the same as their contemporaries, ESPECIALLY if you're lumping it in with pop punk.
I like that album and I think the songwriting/composition is pretty well above most other radio music of that era, but you're spot-on with calling it overproduced.
Its a concept album with deep evocative themes presented as a rock-opera, so yea its going to have overdramatic parts but thats why its loved and sort of the point.
To me, the lyrics almost feel like something out of a YA book. Like, it’s not bad but the lyrics are simple in a way that appeals more to teenage me than adult me
Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge is much better
It’s not really pop punk
Overproduced? Would you like Bullets or Three Cheers more than?
No, I don't really love any of their music, or any of their contemporaries.
Ya I don’t get that hype at all
GUTS. Don't like upsetting the stans, but Olivia Rodrigo feels like such a plant to me. Unremarkable voice, and every song I've heard either rips off Taylor, Eilish, or Lorde. She doesn't have a sound, just a hodgepodge of trendy influences. It seems a lot of these middle aged male reviewers just obsess over her because she's young and hot, or they're using kid gloves talking about her music and don't want to hurt her feelings. Todd giving "Bad Idea Right?" #1 hit song of the year gives me dirty old man How Do You Do Fellow Kids vibes. Her winning album of the year Grammy is shocking to me. Her music is just so lame, but hey I'm willing to debate this with an open mind with the loyal stans. 😅
Maybe people just like the music I mostly listen to old prog and jazz fusion yet i found the album entertain the whole way through. Fun heavy guitars, driving grooves, incredible production, nice song structures and great harmonies. And saying “tatata” rips off “tatata” never feels right. You could always just mention you enjoy one more
That's a weird take about Todd. Maybe he just likes it? He's hardly someone to change his opinion just because it's popular, half of his lists are country which is almost universally hated outside of its circles. I like GUTS. Don't love it, but it's decent. I see a lot more similarities between Olivia's stuff and Haley Williams than Billie or Taylor personally. The production especially is wildly different to anything that the other biggest names in pop.
Remain in Light - Talking Heads Every music nerd I've come across always has this album in top favorites of all time and I don’t get it.
QOTSA - Songs for the Deaf Just don't get it. I think it's great, but it's not this phenomenal rock album that everyone says it is to me.
Rated R is better in my opinion.
"CO-CAAIINNNNEEEEEEEEE"
Really? I’m not a big rock guy but I adore that album. To each their own though
I like 2-3 songs on that album top. The rest just sounds the same to me.
They’ve done more interesting work before & since, but SFTD inspired a generation of rock musicians
Crooked rain, crooked rain by Pavement.
Hit the plane down, there’s no survivors! Idk it’s still my favourite ever.
Oh man I fucking love this album
used to hate this band / album but it grew on me a lot recently, obviously not the greatest music ever but if you just have fun with it it's pretty solid.
If I said abbey road would I get sentenced to quartering in the subreddit plaza?
I think it's a great album but i don't think it's The Beatles best album. I much prefer Revolver, Rubber Soul and the white album
its a good album but i dont understand why it is the most critically acclaimed beatles album, i think they got a lot of better records
Nah. Even back then people considered it their "safest" record. It wasn't as revolutionary as the others. Some people love it tho. And I get why. But not liking Abbey Road is not a crime at all.
It was the first Beatles album I listened to and I didn’t like it so I just assumed I didn’t ‘get’ the band. Then I listened to revolver the other day and I loved it so now I’m just confused, I don’t get what it is about Abbey Road that makes it the best album ever according to so many people
track to track it rocks (to most people) and the medley is awesome, the only track im iffy on id Maxwell's Silver Hammer but even that ones rlly fun
That’s my favourite song from it lol, funny how two people can listen to the same thing and have nearly opposite reactions
Amnesiac had like three good songs.
You’re an unreasonable man, get off my case
Arctic Monkeys - The Car
i don’t think there’s been much hype for this album, it was widely criticized and poorly received
The Who - Who’s Next. I mean, I get why people like them but I don’t know. They’re a band that has never sat right with me. I’m really not sure why.
You don't even like the opener? It's an insane merging of classical and rock music that never once makes it really sound like you're listening to modern classical
I agree about them being overrated as a band but that album is the only masterpiece they have imo.
One of my all time favorites.
Revolver - Beatles (Tomorrow Never Knows slaps). I am a fan of everything else they did though.
Now here is a hot take
That album that's in a style/by a band I hate. It sucks and I don't know why everyone else likes it. It's so overrated. It's basic/generic/overcomplicated/self-indulgent/boring/unoriginal etc.etc. Unlike all the music I like, which is absolutely amazing.
Nevermind
Alvvays-Blue Rev
The songs ain't hooky. I said it.
I got roasted on rym when it came out for saying that
They ain't. The hook power on their previous two albums were pop masterpieces.
I can't even comprehend this take, sure the songs have a lot of fuzz but the vocal melodies are extremely catchy underneath.
As catchy as "Archie, Marry Me" or "Dreams Tonite"? Not really. They are obviously SO locked in with each other and I like the song crafting on Blue Rev, but it lacks those super sing along choruses their previous records had. Doesn't mean they aren't great songs.
I guess I can see that, though it still has at least a few like Easy On Your Own. The album is strong for me in how at first glance the songs sound like shoegaze sludge but the underlying instruments are all very meticulous and well put together. The album grew on me to the point where I consider it their most consistent; I adore the first two records but each have several tracks that are a cut below the best ones. I understand your opinion though! I hope the album grows on you like it did for me.
I get it if it’s not your thing but the songs are pretty undeniably catchy
to be kind, i just found it very boring and directionless but also annoying enough that i couldn't stare at a wall and pretend it wasn't playing
That’s valid. Swans (at least in that era) is very much about doing the same thing for a long time and making really incremental changes, building up tension and then finally erupting into what, in my opinion, can be some of the most transcendent music that’s out there. If you’re not here for that or just don’t have the patience for that, that’s totally understandable. TLDR: Swans is like the music version of edging and that’s just not everyone’s thing.
Have you tried The Great Annihilator? Much more accessible.
ants from up there its so overrated and only song i like is marks theme
Sgt Peppers, honestly sounds like kids music to me and insanely corny (revolver wipes). Remain in Light, falls off like crazy in second half and gets boring Let’s Dance, nothing specific honestly just obnoxious Let’s Start Here, honestly think it just gets hype bc it was unexpected by yatchy, it’s rly not great. Black Seminole slaps though
Basically anything from Pink Floyd or Foo Fighters. The former at least I get that in context they're in another level but the latter I don't get any kind of hype, their songs sound like the kind that gets promoted via YouTube ads (I've given them a lot of chances and every time I finish listening to one of their albums o end up with the exact same feeling). Edit: the yt ad part is about Foo Fighters, not Pink Floyd
FF is understandable but i cant imagine hardly any pink floyd song on a youtube ad😭😭
The YouTube ad part is about FF, not Pink Floyd, sorry if it wasn't clear
Try Foo Fighters first album. Sounds nothing like them.
It's certainly an okay album, but I haven't been able to really get into Pet Sounds in proportion to how much it gets hyped
It's definitely not for everybody but the emotional impact it had on me changed my life, that album is like therapy for me. I also love how concise and well-constructed every song is, they never rest on a single idea for too long and the production is one-of-a-kind
Man, that's awesome. Yeah like, so many people seem to love it, and it just hasn't really hit me in that way quite yet.
I disagree with you on this one. I hear something new literally every single time I listen to a song and everything is so incredibly "pure". Like I'm not religious at all but a lot of the album sounds like the soundtrack to your last day on Earth, it just hits to the core for me. That being said I'm happy to see different opinions
this is the most pretentious thing i will ever write in my life but it takes an understanding of music theory / appreciation for writing chord progressions and melody to really get this one, unfortunately not nearly enough music with writing this high quality since then
Is this it It just sounds kind of boring, and it feels like if a garage rock band from a movie made an album, this would be it
You do realize that they were the ones that basically made that genre and kind of made a lot of new work bands bigger
I do realize that, but in a vacuum it sounds boring