Justify disliking this album.
This thread is terrible
>>61207458
It steals ideas from other albums that do it better. Pic related
>>61207458
I haven't listened to it, but I don't like the cover.
I like it but I could see how Lonely at the Top could turn someone off the album as a whole.
It's part of that "POST FUTURE A E S T H ET IC" circlejerk. Concentrating on sound design doesn't equate to forward thinking genius
I don't dislike it, but I certainly don't like listening to it's edgelord production.
>>61207458
If pseudo intellectual "artsy" musician cant even make decent cover the album is not worth the time.
>>61207530
>>61207566
>>61207685
None of these are good justifications for disliking the music.
>>61208063
But it is and on top of that i even watched the Interference video which is top tier cringe material.
>>61207458
its literally the In Colors of vaporwave
came out 3 years too late made by someone too normie to realize they're late to the scene which makes complete sense why normies like it
>>61208131
Which one is you.
>music video influencing your assessment of the music itself
Beginning to understand why you think you've justified your position: You don't understand criticism.
>>61207458
>that ASMR track
>>61208168
>grossly equating it to a mere vaporwave album
Ignore the textures, glitch (pop), IDM and total voice manipulation; since it also incorporates vaporwave elements it's outdated and just recycling old ideas.
ya'll haven't mentioned anything about the music so far besides the word production. you guys are really bad at explaining why you don't like something without referring to image in some way
>>61208240
not him but none of
>textures, glitch (pop), IDM and total voice manipulation
would make it new 2bh
but being new isn't everything, who cares how new something is when you're giving it such a rough description, the devil is in the detail with this kind of stuff anyway
why am i still typing
>>61208187
Why dont you tell me why you think she is so good?All i hear is generic and cheap "so rebellious and deep" music.
>>61208300
this. saying it's not 100% new is a pretty dumb criticism. you'd be pretty hard pressed to find something that was completely new and original that came out in 2015 that didn't take influence from literally anything. and even then, if our only standards for making a good album means it has to be completely new then we wouldn't really have much at all.
>this thread
>>61208281 is right
>>61208356
that's not the point of this thread. also back up what makes it generic, what makes it cheap, and why you have someone else's opinion of it being rebellious and deep in your head when thinking about this album. but please do so in terms of strictly the music
i liked it and I like holly
but atm she seems like a waste. kinda scammed her way into stanford and is getting paid to make music which is pretty cool
but with all the latest equipment and shit she has. her stuff is still behind opn,dean,arca and even those pc music/sophie fags
songwriting is lacking.
Like the asmr track. but im ranting and going off-topic op
I dislike the album because it's similar to fucking mutant where each song is a long intro something good but it never cranks it up a gear and song ends
but I still think it's a 7/10.
sorry if i didn't really add anything. maybe my ears are in pleb mode but If i wanted something challenging I'd listen to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_JHjUFfOs8
>>61208549
I don't think it's challenging. That's the appeal.
It's glitch pop with really cool and tight vocal manipulation.
>>61208631
yeah I get that but I thought copelands glitch pop record from last yr was bttr
but then again im a pleb so maybe i have bad taste
>>61207458
I can't OP, that album is lovely
Why are you so autistic at defending this album OP? It's not like you played a part on making it.
>>61208631
yeah i don't find this album challenging at all, which is why i like it. it's pretty diverse in the the amount of places it goes and does so in a way that makes the album function as a whole piece.
>>61208692
why does liking one album make another artists contribution to an already pretty massive scene bad? can't one release something good as well as another? it's not like it's a competition. and not liking something because others didn't pay as much attention to another album you liked is kinda dumb too.
>>61208844
maybe it's holly shitposting here
>>61208844
not op but there's not much to defend against when there hasn't been a valid criticism of the music yet. i would say the autistic thing is the amount of hate this gets
Prodigy really, is she creative?
This album proved positive.
>>61208904
get a load of this
worthless retard
>>61208909
Well yeah all the arguments are shit, but OP being so militant about it is ridiculous. The thread literally started with "THIS ISN'T BAD, FIGHT ME".
And I haven't even listened to this album.
>>61208868
yeah you're right op's album is so good :)
silly me
>>61208964
well actually it literally started with saying to justify not liking it. which people then jumped right to the image of it and other people's perceptions of it. all they had to do to justify was say, "not my cup of tea" and they would be justified. and i dont think its that ridiculous, just looking for legitimate conversation like everyone else on this board.
>>61208976
you don't have to like it. there's plenty of reasons not to like this album. but the arguments in this thread against so far have all been about image, not music. which is a pretty shitty reason to not like music, especially for someone who spends their time frequenting a music board.
>>61209105
yeah thats fine. but /mu/ is complete blankless including myself on this new electronica shit that doesn't really have a genre name think opn is the only really accessible artist dean,holly,pc,arca are doing a bunch of shit that I can't really explain , I just know some of the shit sounds really good to me. and some I just don't get
you called it glitch pop so maybe,
try posting it on /bleep/ or google search this album you might get some good discussion.
Op here. Nice to see all these people taking the bait and outing themselves as completely shallow individuals that let the image of the artist sway their opinions.
>>61209105
Yeah but why not go for something like "hey guys what did you think of this album? I liked it because this, this and that".
OP is just retarted, or has too much time in his hands.
>>61209299
i didn't call it glitch pop, that was someone else. but yeah i totally agree with you on this stuff. those artists are kind of forming a new thing together. theres a bunch from those that i really like and that are going to make some amazing stuff in the future in addition to the great stuff they already put out. and yeah if i want actual discussion on music i'd go someplace else, /mu/ definitely isn't the place to hear someone's opinion that's actually beneficial to pay to attention to.
>>61209408
see
>>61209408
I listened to this album a few days ago. Maybe it would be more accurate to say that I heard it; I was playing video game while it played. As someone who is very vocally oriented, I appreciated the vocal production on the album. It never let me ignore a song, never allowed the music to fade into the background. At the same time, it never demanded my attention. Nothing on the album ever forced me to pause and close my eyes. Until "Lonely at the Top" started. I was shocked and relaxed and slightly aroused all at the same time. By the end of the album I decided that I'd had a pleasant experience, and Platform deserves revisiting with my full attention. Initial reaction: 6.5/10.
>>61209513
whoops
meant >>61209309
for the second not >>61209408
not
>>61207458
ASMR is for emotionally-stunted neckbeards, and the fact that people unironically listen to it makes me uncomfortable.
As someone who makes music, I can really appreciate the work that went into it and love the album as a whole.
But as a music listener, it's just okay.
I feel like the majority of the positive attributes of the album lie in trying to figure out how she manipulated or synthesized certain sounds. And there is a great deal of that, which can be rewarding to pick apart. But on a purely "musical" basis (i.e: how it sounds in itself and not thinking of it as a created entity) it falls short of other similar releases this year - particularly Mutant. She had the same issue on Movement, which was interesting in academic terms, but had little to offer on a musical basis. So I don't think it's unreasonable for people to dislike it, because most of the people listening to this album don't have more than a passing interest in the theory of its production or its place in the academic 'avant-garde'. But if she paired up with someone with more talent in making identifiably structured music, akin to Arca's collab projects, she could easily be leading the pack.
>>61210074
So you didn't actually listen to the album, just the one skit. Nice post.
>>61210144
You're entirely correct, but I have no motivation to listen to an album that includes something like that.
It is the epitome of faux avant-garde
>>61210160
>>61210074
So it's okay to listen to ironically?
>>61207505
hips, learn something:
IT'S NOT STEALING
IT'S SYNTHESIZING
>>61210160
but it's literally the only ASMR track on the album. the rest is completely different.
