Well what if they have a shit voice that I don't wanna hear clearly?

It's an artistic preference. There isn't any more appeal to it than a painting done with cheap paint.

aesthetics

I couldnt imagine hanatarsh being any other fidelity

Sometimes it adds to the ambiance. I really dug the low production on GY!BE's F#A# infinity and LYSF just because it gave it another layer of death and desolation. Great mixing met with low production can give you a really neat effect.

Some people just like shitty recordings and mixing just for the sake of it being different, which I personally find obnoxious.

>>61051302
how old are you

>>61051302
Gives a feeling of nostalgia, sometimes the tape saturation creates immersion not often found in crisp digital recordings. Stylistic choice

I like the raw, fuzzy and dirty sound and the genuine and intimate feel it gives, like if your friend gave you his band's basement-recorded demo CD.

It reminds me of sitting by the fire/in the rain/tv static in the background. Warmth, yummy tape warmth.

easily transportable, physical media, tape spinning does magical unexplainable things during recording, catalog-able, literally the only alternative to using a DAW

>>61051302
when the sounds is different
the vibe is different

i have always valued ambiguity in music and it seems to be what i think about (mostly) when i am trying to figure out whether or not i like certain albums.

by ambiguity i mean lack of clarity in what the song is trying to do, or in what a certain instrument sounds like. i feel like i have a preset idea of what each instrument sounds like, and if i hear an instrument on a song clearly then i can make a pretty good idea of it in my head, and after every single bit of sound in a song is clear to me, it becomes easier for me to enjoy every aspect of the album and realise if i like or dislike the album.
the thing is though, once i enjoy every aspect of it, there is no reason for me to listen to it again because i already absorbed every piece of information it had to offer to me, and it becomes boring, even if i really enjoyed it (that is what i usually label as "earcandy" - enjoyable songs that get tiring quickly)

that is why i enjoy lo-fi stuff and distortion - if i cannot clearly identify what something sounds like, i cannot analyse and plausibly pinpoint the exact emotions that the song is trying to convey/evoke to/in me. that makes me revisit that kind of music, it is basically me trying again to accurately and objectively interpretate that album, and that makes me listen to the album over and over again without getting tired of it, because i hear something that i didnt the last time i listened to it, or i noticed a detail that i hadn't before, or i interpreted something in it differently, etc.. it is basically a different experience every time.

(cont)

>>61051698
(cont)

the lone fact that i listen to something more often does not exactly mean that i enjoy it more, but i am a believer that the more i listen to something the more i appreciate it. i think this is why a lot of people find that certain albums grow on them (not very earcandy at first, but "ambiguous", for a lack of a lesser meme-y word)

finding the best albums for me are a matter of finding something that can leave a great first impression on me and at the same time deliver that "ambiguity" that keeps me listening to it for years.

There are plenty of lo-fi albums I like that would sound way too sweet if they had some great production or something, so in some cases it can just be a way to add some murkiness and fuzziness to something.
>>61051357
>Gives a feeling of nostalgia
This too. It can make the music sound like it's a part of a time long gone which can really add to the emotion they're trying to portray.
>>61051436
This is probably the most succinct explanation you'll get.

lo-fi recordings are usually more raw and personal feeling.