I'm new to /mu/ because I'm fucking tired of listening to the Dark Side of the Moon every single day. I've found a few great albums through the Essentials Charts.
But what's so great about this album?? Why does everyone like it so much. I listened to it and I really don't get what's so great about it.
>>60387695
Some folks like it, others don't. It's all a matter of taste.
Welcome to /mu/ anyways. Hope you find more shit to love here.
Oh you didn't like it? Im pretty sure that makes you a gay retarded black communist. Might as well kill yourself OP
>>60387707
>>60387716
this is /mu/, OP
I don't like it either. you aren't alone. it's not just a meme though. it's pretty highly acclaimed
>>60387729
Literally this. lmao
the strength is in the lyrics & the emotional/psychological honesty
don't get me wrong, it also sounds very nice. the production is nice, full & warm
i think the simple arrangement of the songs complements the more complex themes perfectly
Honestly dude it wouldn't hurt you to get some new music recs from here, but if you value your current state of being then don't get sucked into /mu/. 4chan and /mu/ have made me into a very cynical and elitist person, please just don't lose yourself, anon.
>>60387816
It's okay. It's not like it's anything special. I don't know why you guys like shitty audio recording either but it's probably because of a desperate desire to feel justified in your weirdness.
It's probably just a taste thing. If you didn't like it on your first or second listen then you probably won't on any others.
If your looking for good music, I would like to recommend this album, Lift Your Skinny Fists Like Antennas To Heaven.
>>60387816
Also, not redoing a track when your voice cracks isn't deep or unique, it's lazy.
>>60387875
don't assume shit about people.
everyone has different tastes. sometimes, i like really clean poppy production. sometimes, i like warm lo-fi fuzzies.
and it's not even "weird" to like this album, it's based on very catchy chord progressions, all in 4/4 time, played mostly on acoustic guitar. i mean, c'mon. it's not fucking trout mask replica
>>60387945
as soon as i read this post my uncle called to tell me he has terminal cancer
>>60387935
>If you didn't like it on your first or second listen then you probably won't on any others.
That's the opposite of what most people say about ITAOTS: that it's a grower and often takes a few tries.
Give it another shot OP, that is if you're interested enough in giving it a shot (which I assume you might be considering you made a thread about it)
>>60387695
Are you here to talk about this album? Or do you want some recs to get you on the way to some great new music?
>>60387958
Good. Maybe he'll last words will be, "Not fixing mistakes doesn't make you avant garde, it makes you a faggot hipster with bad technique" Maybe then you'll learn.
>>60387953
There is a meme obsession on the board. I've only come here like 3 times and every time I see multiple threads about this mediocre hipster whining.
>>60387945
>deep
>unique
is that all you think it is perceived as
>>60388003
What are the upsides to not redoing your vocals when you fuck up multiple times in a song? I'd really like to hear them.
>>60388003
And before you answer, realize that he's not exactly fucking up on difficult notes to hit for a professional musician.
>>60388021
Just outta curiosity whats your favorite album?
>>60387945
and again, when the fuck did i ever say anything of the like? no one goes to neutral milk hotel b/c "omg, i love my singers to have voices that crack!!" we listen b/c it moves us, and jeff's minor vocal slip-ups don't really stand in the way of what we love about the songwriting, the lyrics, and the sound.
>>60387994
sure, because a lot of people find meaning and enjoyment and love and beauty in something, but you don't, it's suddenly "hipster whining". fuck off
i don't even understand how you can read jeff's lyrics and think it sounds "whiny". i mean, i could understand that about radiohead's lyrics, but jeff's lyrics are usually just surreal imagery and strange physical descriptions
>>60387695
If you likes DSotM, check out the whole genre of space rock. Stuff like Lunar Dunes and even some And So I Watch You From Afar give me the same atmosphere.
>>60388074
Cracking everytime you got to a higher pitched refrain in a song which isn't that hard in the first place isn't a minor slip up, that's pretty fucking bad technique.
>>60388072
Probably O.S.T by People Under the Stairs. I am a guitarist and vocalist that has played for money at bars and restaurants, and I would be embarrassed if I fucked up that bad live. Now I'll ask again, what's the upside to not redoing vocals that you fucked up?
>>60388021
It sounding good that way is a good start, which I think it does
Other than that, it fits the aesthetic of a rag tag group of 60s psychedelia obsessed folky weirdo amateur musicians recording an album by the seat of their pants. They barely knew if they had an album worth of songs to record when they went into the studio, and that's part of the charm. The album is raw, immediate and passionate. There are ways of being raw and passionate while also having a very polished sound, but the point is that there is more than one way of achieving that result.
>>60388040
Jeff isn't a highly skilled singer (other than his breathing technique, which is very good), and that's fine. Howling Wolf doesn't need to sound like Bing Crosby, and neither does Jeff Mangum. Certain types of singing fits certain musical aesthetics.
>>60388133
You could fetishize nearly any album by a decent band to this extent and it would make just as much sense. I'm not saying this is bad overall, I'm just saying it's nothing special, definitely not worth the obsession it creates here.
>>60388127
You'll never make anything even half as good as a single song off ITAOTS desu BLOKE
did you listen to silent shout by the knife, op.
>>60388159
What is the upside to fucking up vocals that a professional musician shouldn't fuck up and not re-recording it until you get it right?
>>60388178
I personally like his vocals so i cannot answer your question kind sir
>>60388151
>You could fetishize nearly any album by a decent band to this extent and it would make just as much sense
If they are genuine and not contrived, sure. It's not the lo fi aesthetic that makes the album great, it's one of the contributing factors. The majority of why I love the album is the melody and lyrics, and everything else adds to that.
>I'm just saying it's nothing special, definitely not worth the obsession it creates here.
I disagree, and you (I claim) should consider the fact that maybe you're just not into it. I've been listening to and talking to people about this album for years and I never get tired of either. I always find something new to admire about it.
>>60388178
If it sounds good that way. There are many instances where this is true. For example, being somewhat sharp during the peak of a rising melody can increase the tension and/or momentum of the melody and make it more exciting. A slight voice crack during a somber moment can evoke tenderness and innocence. There are countless ways a not-so-perfect take could indeed be just what the song needs.
>>60388127
>I played a couple shitty gigs at dive bars and therefore I am better than an artist who has played at legitimate venues for thousands of fans
lol this board is delusional
>>60388133
yes yes yes.
jeff's singing fits the music well.
if you had christina aguilera or pavarotti singing the same lyrics over the instrumentation, it would sound ridiculous and out of place, no matter how good their technique was.
>>60388151
yeah, and that's totally okay!!! if someone makes a real spiritual & emotional connection to a taylor swift album, who the fuck am i to tell them they shouldn't have that? if it helps them grow as a person, that's wonderful.
but btw, in my opinion, the number of bands whose lyrics come close to matching NMH's is very low. jeff's lyrics are very stream-of-consciousness, at times seemingly nonsensical, but the imagery is really compelling (to me) and there are so many nested metaphors that i'm still discovering stuff
i love music that i can return to and continue to find meaning in, which this album does splendidly.
>>60388189
He fucks up several times on Oh Comely for example. He makes some really nasty cracks and otherwise imprecise vocals when he goes to the higher parts.
>>60388197
Like what the fuck is the shitty horn playing or whatever abomination happens for like 20 seconds near the end of the title track? It's awful.
>>60388224
When you're singing something hard I could understand.
>>60388235
Listen man, it's dozens not a few and I'm talking about something that's easily observable. In one song he cracks on notes that aren't hard to hit several times, it sounds bad. I really hate this characteristic of indie music where bad technique and sloppy guitar playing is passed off as innovative and cool. It's a convenient excuse to not perfect your art.
>>60388270
I wouldn't be a dick about this if this board wasn't total cocks about music that's even slightly well known besides Taylor Swift.
>>60388270
you sound like a girl t b h f a m i l i a
>>60388288
dude just kill yourself you narcissistic motherfucker
>>60388288
>I played dozens of shitty gigs at dive bars and therefore I am better than an artist who has played at legitimate venues for thousands of fans
How is this any better?
>>60388288
>Like what the fuck is the shitty horn playing or whatever abomination happens for like 20 seconds near the end of the title track? It's awful.
I love it and similarly to Jeff's singing, Scott isn't a fantastic horn player. His arrangements are wonderful and his amateur playing adds to the charm of the album.
>When you're singing something hard I could understand.
That's irrelevant. The point is that mistakes can be used purposefully after the fact as an aesthetic choice. Tom Waits has one way of singing that works for what he does, and Chaka Khan has another. Neither are wrong.
>>60388342
I'm sorry that I expect professional musicians to be proficient at their instruments.
>>60388349
I didn't say I was better at writing or composing, I said that fucking up at singing something that isn't hard for a professional musician shouldn't be something that goes without criticism. Only two dive bars actually.
>>60388358
>oh he's not good it's charming
There's a difference between having a weird voice and being a mediocre singer.
>>60388358
Like his mistakes are something that you correct because it's bad technique. I don't know how that's an alien concept.
>>60388288
For context, Jeff and his friends were very interested in music from other cultures growing up, and it shows in their music.
The whole wavering, cracking voice thing is a big part of Bulgarian folk music, which Jeff loves. (he actually compiled an album of the stuff at a Bulgarian folk festival)
Some of the other atonal stuff is also influenced by other cultures.
See, Western music is very specific about "this sounds ugly! This is bad! Don't do this!" Meanwhile, many other cultures have embraced those things. Take microtones, for instance. Most Western musicians would hate that shit, but Turkey and India have utilized them for millennia.
Atonal, microtonal, noisy music influenced Jeff & his gang from the very beginning, so it's not surprising that it shows up in their work.
also
>I wouldn't be a dick about this if this board wasn't total cocks about music
just because you're surrounded by dicks doesn't mean you need to become one
>>60388358
>>60388349
I mean it you guys, I wouldn't be a dick about this unless you guys were total cocks about your music preferences, which you are. I got people telling me that my taste in music sucks when I said I enjoy Arctic Monkeys and Led Zeppelin on the same page as a Taylor Swift thread and another fucking spam thread for this band. It's insufferable.
>>60388382
>There's a difference between having a weird voice and being a mediocre singer.
And neither are necessarily bad. You can have a mediocre singing technique and a weird voice (or either one or the other) and still have a voice that sounds good and fits the aesthetic of the music. It's how it is framed aesthetically.
>Like his mistakes are something that you correct because it's bad technique.
Or they're something you keep in because they sound good and fit the aesthetic and spirit of the music. Again: please consider the fact that you just personally don't like the music and that it's not just us being deluded into thinking we love something.
>>60388431
No need to lash out on random people because you had a random encounter with some random people that didn't like the same music as you. That's ridiculous.
>>60388434
I'm not saying you're not justified in liking it, but it's hard not to get pissed when this album with obvious technical flaws is praised without resistance and if something is somewhat well known it is regarded as bad regardless of that band's technical skill or other abilities.
>>60388458
It doesn't take much time here to figure out that's the norm.
>>60388472
i want you to respond to the post i made above about NMH's ties to non-western music. i think it helps explain a lot
also, i'm sorry that people are dicks on this board, but that's all the more reason to not act like one. we need fewer dicks here
>>60388472
>it's hard not to get pissed when this album with obvious technical flaws is praised without resistance
You shouldn't get pissed at people for liking music you don't like. As soon as you understand that you're dislike for the music is a subjective part of your personal taste, it will be easy not to get angry about people liking it.
>if something is somewhat well known it is regarded as bad regardless of that band's technical skill or other abilities.
I'm sorry someone else did that to you, but that has nothing to do with this album or anyone here that isn't saying that at this moment
>>60388504
I just said it wasn't as good as you guys say and there are obvious technical flaws. When I enter into a discussion about how good a band is, I expect their material to not be filled with technical errors. Yes, voice cracking and singing off key are technical errors.
>>60388541
>I just said it wasn't as good as you guys say
And your reasons (e.g technical flaws) are irrelevant and are purely your subjective taste. You just aren't into the music, and the perceived flaws are in fact integral to the music.
>>60388504
Just like if he missed notes on a fretboard or played the wrong notes by accident when playing a scale, he's fucking up with bad technique.
>>60388570
You said you like zeppelin. Part of what makes Jimmy Page such a great live guitarist are his fuck ups and his general dirtiness. He's sloppy as fuck and that's one thing that's great about him.
>>60388564
>>60388602
Going offbeat by accident and hitting bad notes is a flaw. That's a mistake. It may be accepted in some types of music, but that doesn't change the fact that it's people failing to perform their jobs as musicians properly. Fucking up notes sounds objectively bad. There are very rare circumstances where you can say anything in music is objectively anything, but I'd be saying the same thing if he went off beat by accident.
Either way I'm out. Enjoy your hipster whining.
>>60388640
You're completely wrong and the biggest of fuck ups can be a piece of music's biggest asset. Your criticisms are irrelevant, trivial and subjective. Thanks for insulting me and accusing me of whining when I was trying to talk to you about an album I like. By the way, you had your taste insulted by random people so you made a thread flinging shit about an album a lot of people like. Yeah, we're whining.
>>60388640
ye fuck off
>>60388640
>>60388488
Just because a lot of people on this board are underage retards doesn't mean that it's okay to be an underage retard
>ITT: Successful trolling.
>>60388819
damage control
also arctic monkeys are legitimately bad. Not because they're popular either, because Taylor Swift is legitimately better than them
