Scaruffi Reviews Soon
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
The one true god of music critics has released teaser lists for his upcoming reviews for the 2015 and 2016 seasons.
He says he doesn't have time for reviews in this time of the year, but they will be coming at a later time.
In the meantime...
>Radiohead BTFO
>Bowie's Blackstar BTFO
>Chance BTFO
>Car Seat Headrest BTFO
>Kanye West BTFO
Agree with all of those except Pablo. It's the forefront of contemporary popular music whether you like it or not.
...and the 2015 teaser
>kanye west
>rock
Ho mah god
Are any of the ones he mentions liking worth listening to?
>>65094293
>scaruffi fell for the lil ugly meme
fuck...
>>65094359
He's a fucking elder god level hipster so I don't know almost any of the ones he liked t b h, but I did enjoy King Goblin, Lifetones, and Lil Ugly Mane
You have to admit that Radiohead's latest album is an improvement over their last three, even if that's not much desu.
>>65094396
He did rate all the last three 5/10. I'm guessing AMSP will be at least a 6/10.
>>65094293
im happy he likes no now
>>65094228
Teens of Denial was disappointing shit, everyone is just sucking Will's cock hard, I'll agree with him on that.
I wonder if he'll go back and check out his early band camp stuff when he writes CSH's review page. I'd be interested to see what he thinks of My Back is Killing Me Baby, it was a really fucking good record, and unlike ToD it was actually interesting and it wasn't all generic indie rock band shit.
>>65094490
you must be new
>>65094490
if this is b8 it's pretty good
>>65094228
>>65094293
Oh Scruffy, being contrarian as usual. At least he liked Clarence Clarity
>>65094676
Probably not. Even if he listens to something he could sincerely consider a 9, the bastard is too set in his contrarian attitude.
I mean shit it may not be impossible. He did give out an 8.5 a couple years back.
>>65094676
Bottomless Pit
>>65094712
What was that, Have One On Me?
>>65094228
>Site Specific
>2016
>A Cosmic Rhythm
>not bland ECM-core
Quick /mu/, what unreviewed album of the last two years is most likely to be a scaruffi 8 or higher???
>>65094806
The History of Flesh
>>65094293
>Blanck Mass
>Clarence Clarity
>Damaged Bug
>Moon Duo
>Fred Frith
>Ugly Mane
>Wand
memes aside, scruffles has pretty decent taste
>>65094495
Scaruffi hasn't given out a 9/10 since the 90's. I wonder if there would be anything good bandcamp that would be worthy of a 9/10 since I imagine you would seee more creativity on a site like that. Even something like Kevin and the Bikes is more fun imo than a lot of other bands.
>>65094880
Because it deserves it.
>>65094900
But the Scaruffi rating gave OBND meme status. I understand the criticism: no 9's all millennium, 1 9.5 for the history of music, then suddenly out of nowhere a 10 for such a politically divisive record? OBND is, to be fair, spectacularly flawed: it hews too close to its obvious inspirations, Trout Mask Replica, Kaoru Abe's Winter 1972, and Stravinsky's Rite of Spring to name a few; some parts, most notably the 9 minute modal jazz fugue 'If My Truck Could Talk', are ambitious to the point of onanism; the dynamics, from -25 dBA RMS for tracks on end to the sound-barrier-breaking cathartic noise tempest on 'Two Night Town: Part II (the Second Night)', make it no less easier to experience for ears more accustomed with modern production styles. I would argue that it is precisely these flaws that give OBND it's effervescent je-ne-sais-pais that keeps me coming back to it time and time again. As Aldean writes in the liner notes to album centerpiece 'Burning it Down':
"Suppose that a man leaps out of a burning building and lands on a bystander in the street below. Now, make the burning building be Europe, and the luckless man underneath be the Palestinian Arabs. Is this a historical injustice? Has the man below been made a victim, with infinite cause of complaint and indefinite justification for violent retaliation? My own reply would be a provisional 'no,' but only on these conditions. The leaper must make such restitution as he can to the man who broke his fall, and must not pretend that he never even landed on him. And he must base his case on the singularity and uniqueness of the original leap. It can't, in other words, be 'leap, leap, leap' for four generations and more. The people underneath cannot be expected to tolerate leaping on this scale and of this duration, if you catch my drift. In Palestine, tread softly, for you tread on their dreams. And do not tell the Palestinians that they were never fallen upon and bruised in the first place.
>>65094495
I agree. So far much of Teens of Denial sounds to me like a parody of indie rock. (When he starts yelling "I know when I'm being catered to!" it sounds like a spoof of bands who try to imitate the Pixies, for one of many examples.) I love many of the lyrics but the quality of the melodies and chord progressions from My Back is Killing Me Baby is sorely missed. That record could be his pinnacle so far. Better than Twin Fantasy IMHO.
I still have hope in Car Seat Headrest though. He's said in interviews that he was just forcing himself to write the songs on Teens of Denial because he was feeling demotivated due to college ending. He wrote How to Leave Town after Teens of Denial and that one's better, so hopefully Wave Goodbye to the Jets will be an improvement.
>>65094944
what are you talking about
>>65094359
If you haven't heard Andy Stott or LUM yet you're a newfag
>>65094396
No.
>>65094944
I'd almost forgotten about this meme
>>65094228
>>65094293
>scaruffi approves of Vatican shadow and Andy stott
Thank you God, now I can confidently say I like these artists
>>65094396
In Rainbows is their magnum opus
>>65095150
lmao
>>65095150
>people actually believe this
>>65094986
He said his next album is his best so let's hope he's right.
>>65094944
sick
>>65094293
>top jazz albums are William Parker and Matana Roberts
LOL
What an avant teen
I read this as "Scaruffi Reviews Son"
>>65095170
>>65095184
It's the culmination of all of the experience they gathered up to that point and expertly merges both their pop and experimental sensibilities. It's literally the only album of theirs that's a 10.
>>65094228
hes not wrong...Lemonade, Teens of Denial, Pablo, and A Moon Shaped Pool are mediocre, the new Chance is shit, and Too Many Voices and City Sun Eater are fantastic records
Blackstar's my AOTY tho so....
>>65094228
>2016
>doesn't formulate own opinions
>>65095255
arent you that /tv/ tripfag who thinks that TFA was a good movie lmao
>>65095255
It's Radiohead realizing that pop melodies are their forte. It's Radiohead realizing that eschewing what made The Bends and OK Computer good is a pretentious affectation, but doing this without completely ignoring the lessons of Kid A.
>>65094228
Fuck yeah Andy Stott
>>65095352
The only good Star Wars movies are the first one and the TFA, and mostly because they stick closely to the monomyth.
>>65095381
>likes TFA
>doesn't think ESB was good
>actually thinks TFA was better than ESB
I actually want to thank you for posting here, thanks. It lets me know I should filter you and never have to see your vapid nonsense again. <3
>>65095255
true
>>65095433
Why do opinions bother you so much? Empire isn't a bad film by any means, but it's baggy and stilted, especially the scenes on cloud city. TFA, on the other hand, moves along pretty briskly, doesn't take itself nearly as seriously, and references the fact that it's a remake in a fairly postmodern way.
>>65095525
you've been ramping up your /mu/ participation this summer and I should start taking note of all the dumb shit you say because you are literally the most embryo trip of all time, including Montie
>>65095255
>>65095359
>>65095381
Great b8 kid.
Let me know when you're grown up so I can show you these embarrassing posts.
>>65095603
>>65095605
Once you kids grow up you'll stop defining yourselves by your opinions and how closely they fall in line with the commonly accepted views of your particular clique. You'll be more willing to accept both conventional views (In Rainbows is one of Radiohead's best albums) and unconventional views (Empire Strikes Back isn't good) without feeling offended or becoming unreasonably upset. You'll learn to stop wearing taste like a garment and actually discuss art with people whom your disagree with.
>>65094347
I think rock is key word for pop in this case
>>65095710
When do you graduate high school?
>>65095755
When you stop losing your shit and causing a scene over a disagreement about a space movie for kids
>>65095710
omg dude reading that was sincerely embarrassing
>>65095802
So you're admitting you're still in high school?
>>65095255
It's mellow pop music with a few instrumental quirks. There's nothing significant about that album. You simply imprinted on it because you listened to it as a young teen.
>>65095710
You can't browse 4chan if you're underage, sorry! :(
>>65095808
Poor tot, I was posting here when you handing in your 9th grade English report on To Kill a Mockingbird
>>65095819
>it's mellow pop music
You can be this reductive about anything with a melody that uses guitars. Most of the songs on In Rainbows don't even follow a verse-chorus-verse structure.
>>65095879
>It's not on the level of Katy Perry, so it's "experimental"
Is this really what we've come to?
>>65095848
You certainly don't show it.
Does he browse this place? How the fuck does he know Will Toledo?
>>65095879
>You can be this reductive about anything with a melody that uses guitars.
The forms, the harmonies, the effects, it's all pop rock. Sorry we know more about music than you.
>Most of the songs on In Rainbows don't even follow a verse-chorus-verse structure.
woah
experimental
>>65095920
You can't be this clueless.
>>65095900
Note, I never actually called it experimental. I said that calling songs like 15 Step a mellow pop tune is reductive. But it is more experimental than the majority of Radiohead albums.
Because that’s all so much of A Moon Shaped Pool does: it turns, and then you reset it. It turns, and you reset it. Repeat, go blue in the face, do whatever you can to find an anchor, something to grab hold of that has that same roughness, that singular feel, of this band at its best. There are pretty songs, albeit shot through with some real Fisher Price: My First Radiohead lyricism – ‘Present Tense’ is a fine case in point, a twitchy shuffle on the skins with a gloopy layer of choral vocals atop it, Yorke declaring: “I won’t stop now / I won’t slack off / Or all this love / Will be in vain.” The irony is measured in fathoms, truly. ‘Glass Eyes’ is another example of delicacy being mistaken for intimacy, for affecting introspection – its fractured piano lines and gently rising strings tick all the aesthetic boxes, and there’s certainly a couple of seconds in it where the walking listener will slow their step to really zero in on the mix. It’s beautiful, categorically, but clichéd with it – again, it’s nowhere near close to Radiohead’s own best in show when it comes to this approach, to songs like ‘Sail To the Moon’ for example or ‘Exit Music’.
>>65095920
scaruffi has been scouring the depths of music longer than you've been alive, kiddo.
>>65095926
Repeating arpeggiating guitars that were inspired by minimalist composers, songs that rely heavily on the use on soundscapes created by looping guitars, linear song structures. It's not avant-garde, but it's not as conventional as OK Computer either.
>>65096030
>Pitchfork BNM
>"""scouring the depths of music"""
>>65096034
>Repeating arpeggiating guitars that were inspired by minimalist composers
Are you fucking kidding me
That's not fucking minimalist that's fucking ancient
Arpeggios are literally as old as tonal harmony you fucking moron
>songs that rely heavily on the use on soundscapes created by looping guitars
Yeah that makes it way more experimental than Climbing on the Walls.
>linear song structures
No, they use Quaternary structures like they always have.
>>65095905
I'm not the one shitting the bed over disagreements, and using taste as a determining factor of someone's maturity
>>65096082
i meant in general. it should be no surprise that scaruffi is familiar with an artist receiving a lot of buzz, given the scope of his taste.
>>65094228
>"Radiohead BTFO"
>"Bowie's Blackstar BTFO"
>AMSP and Blackstar on the best rock albums of 2016 list
>>65096085
>That's not fucking minimalist that's fucking ancient
I would like you to point to spot where I implied that arpeggiation was invented by minimalist composers. The songs, which used repeating arpeggios, were inspired by minimalism, which was about repeating common chords to a steady rhythm as the songs slowly build.
>>65096260
>which was about repeating common chords to a steady rhythm as the songs slowly build.
Yeah dominant elevenths are very common chords.
Very similar to the B minor of Weird Fishes and Jigsaw.
>>65096260
not that guy but you haven't explained how the same effect is achieved by 5 minute pop songs. a big part of minimalism's use of repetition is the length of the pieces in question
>>65096260
>>65096305
Listen to these common chords:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaATmagbYsw
the progression of JMDFYS's """"taste"""", everybody
>>65096260
>>65096305
>>65096344
Listen to this very clear tonality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Np9yApXD94
>it's a "everyone replies to a fucking tripfag" thread
>>65096365
I don't like using this word but jesus christ what a fucking embryo
>>65096365
Man I didn't think anyone had that bad of taste at 19.
Arguably worse than Montie.
>>65096365
this is obviously a joke
>>65096365
good LORD
that's just depressing
he managed to avoid... everything
>>65096305
>Yeah dominant elevenths are very common chords.
You have a very limited grasp of what minimalism is. I was using Rodda's definition, which actually includes many of the characteristic of songs like Weird Fishes.
>>65096309
This is a silly distinction. First, inspired by doesn't imply sharing every characteristic with. And second, minimalism in popular music has never been about creating compositions with the depth of the works by John Adams or Steve Reich. Again, inspired by, not literally making minimalist art music.
>>65096365
>arcade fire
>dirty projectors
>fucking G R I Z Z L Y B E A R
>that p4k-approved token "experimental" album
can't make this shit up
>>65096436
>You have a very limited grasp of what minimalism
No, it's actually very comprehensive since I've you know, studied their scores and listened to them discuss their music.
>>65096365
My friend, I made this as a reaction to the poseurs who listed increasingly obscure and esoteric albums in order to illustrate their musical progression. To the proles who use taste as means of showing everyone how idiosyncratic they are. The RYM users and Scaruffi readers who wear music like an expensive garment and use it as a means of identifying themselves by who they aren't.
>>65096524
>i like shitty entry-level music and everyone who doesn't is just pretending!!
lmao you're a joke
>>65096524
Like what? Name the offending "poser" albums
>>65096555
Go to the thread and look at the most recent picks on their charts
>>65096547
Perceiving any music as entry-level is profoundly anti-art
>>65096508
Good for you. That's a nice appeal.
>>65096572
>Go to the thread and look at the most recent picks on their charts
Name them
Just any. 3 of them
If you don't know them thats fine
>>65096436
how do you demonstrate that a common musical element is inspired by a compositional style that isn't employed at all in the music you're discussing?
>>65096616
Repetitive melodic patters, slowly changing chords, constant harmony, motoric rhythms. All present somewhere on the album.
>>65096720
>repetitive melodic patterns
so, pop/rock music
>slowly changing chords
chord changes have been common to pop/rock music since the Beatles
>constant harmony
literally what
>motorik rhythms
i don't think you know what these are. they're featured prominently in krautrock and have a much bigger role on Kid A and Amnesiac. In Rainbows has a lot more IDM-derived percussive activity
can you explain how any of those are native to minimalism? they feature in minimalism, but the key feature of minimalism is that there's very little forward momentum. taking "inspiration" from minimalism is just a pretentious spin artists give to pop/rock albums. it is antithetical to the way that popular music works and can't be contained in 5 minute compositions.
>>65096599
The Microphones are garbage, Tony Molina is post-pavement trash, and Neu! had one good album.
>>65096785
>two very popular bands
>one flavor of the month indieshit album
this doesn't seem too different from your taste
>>65096774
This is sort-of an unwinnable discussion, when every feature of minimalism is dismissed as either not representative of the style or also present in pop music. The truth is that songs like Weird Fishes do feature long (by the standards of a 5 minute song) stretches of repetition and unhurried change.
>they're featured prominently in krautrock and have a much bigger role on Kid A and Amnesiac. In Rainbows has a lot more IDM-derived percussive activity
Got that backwards my friend.
>>65094860
I don't see it
>>65096883
it's not unwinnable. i'm very much winning this discussion because i actually listen to and understand minimalism. you're losing it because you, like every other Radiohead fan, can't just say you like their music for x y or z reason. you have to pretend Radiohead are some like elite intellectual group who perfectly marry pop and art. and you have the gall to call others poseurs. it's really pathetic. i'm glad you trip so i can chart your movements and see how bad your other opinions are.
>>65096846
I'm sorry, let my go back and edit my chart to include all of the Little Women, Cromagnon, Gowns, and forgotten French Chanson I listen to. That way I can telegraph how forward-thinking I am to the tastemakers on RYM who listen to an album once and give it a 1.5/5 in order to make their review curve more cynical and therefore patrician.
>>65096966
Most fans are pretty unbearable before they graduate highschool
>>65096992
no one cares what you listen to. but for some reason you think anyone who listens to anything vaguely below the surface (and all of those are very well-known among people who take music seriously and are older than 17, friend) is just pretending. meanwhile, you as some superstar real music lover can't even read about minimalism for ten minutes to figure out that In Rainbows is not an example of it.
>>65097007
agreed, but Radiohead fans are second only to U2 fans as far as really obnoxious 30-45 year olds who act this way in the real world, too.
>>65094293
>encenathrakh
W E W
>>65096966
I'd like to point out that this discussion started with me claiming that In Rainbows wasn't an experimental album. It was a record that included elements of art music and krautrock (like the previous Radiohead album), but also had a stronger focus on melody that their early 2000s work lacked. But the minimalist influence on some of the tracks isn't even something that should be controversial to point out. Radiohead likes Stave Reich, and Steve Reich liked Radiohead enough to rework some of their tracks. Feigning knowledge in the genre and aesthetic by highlighting the differences between a rock song inspired by minimalism and actual minimalism while refusing to notice the connective tissue between the two doesn't really change that fact. And I'm not a Radiohead fanboy. I despise Hail to the Thief, and think OK Computer is merely OK.
Also, disliking The Force Awakens is a meme that began on /pol/ due to the casting decisions taking race into consideration.
>>65096966
The band that perfectly marries pop and art is early Stereolab. Switch on Vol 2, Space Age Bacholer Music, ETK, Mars Audiac Quintet, and Transient Random Noise Bursts with Announcements.
>>65094289
oh, the autism
>>65097147
>disliking The Force Awakens is a meme
not really
>>65097147
thank you for the history lesson in "This Thread, May 22, 2016-May 22, 2016" now maybe you should invest time researching minimalism instead of recent internet history.
also, i'm not the one arguing with you about space cowboys, but TFA is literally a remake of ANH. you can pull out "muh monomyth" (a really hackneyed retroactive grab at legitimacy by a director who had made a pretty poor ripoff of Kurosawa) all day long, but it doesn't make you somehow elevated and more mature than people who don't like it.
>>65097015
>and all of those are very well-known among people who take music seriously and are older than 17, friend
What's you think of Throat?
>>65097227
it was one of the first jazz-ish albums i tried out to bridge my taste from "experimental" (read: TMTcore) rock to learning more about jazz. Matana Roberts served a similar function but obviously was a pretty different style and has lasted more over the years for me. Throat is moderately entertaining jazz that clearly was made by and for people who think free jazz was all about the noise and the skronk, but it's a pretty overwrought and boring piece on the whole. i'd give it maybe a 5-6/10
>>65097253
addendum: i think Borbetomagus and Zs execute what they try to do better, Borbetomagus in particular. but i've seen Borbetomagus live, so that probably biases me towards them, since i can fill in a few of the gaps in the recorded work with how good their live improvisation goes. i'm sure if i went to a Zs or Little Women show, i'd get a new appreciation for them.
>>65097186
TFA opens up once you realize that the way the characters in the film perceive the events of the OT mirrors the way the younger audience who might only be familiar with the OT through cultural osmosis also perceives them. The lead protagonist has a rebel toy, and the lead villain is a Vader fanboy.
>>65095359
I'm sorry these autists are hating on you so much, I agree with you 100% and have always felt that way about In Rainbows.
>>65097273
this isn't something one has to "realize." this doesn't even really count as subtext given how in-your-face it is. unlike you, i don't think meta-commentary is inherently insightful, interesting, or provocative. it has to actually have content and a point. your interpretation is just a slightly higher-level version of Gen Xers who clapped like idiots every time an OT character showed up on screen.
>>65097253
Why do you think of Mouskouri's early Greek work prior to her French releases?
>>65097330
i haven't listened to that particular chanson singer, as i'm not very interested in chanson music.
also, i will point out this is the second time in two days that i have gotten into an argument with you and you've decided to sperg out with your rolodex of artists to try to prove some kind of point, and you've never actually come to any sort of point. the ball is still in your court to explain why it is that everyone who listens to music you deem obscure is posturing.
college kids, music and the internet, everybody. fuck this stupid shit
>>65096365
HOLY SHIT I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER LAUGHED THIS MUCH IN MY LIFE. I'M DYING OVER HERE, HOLY FUCK
>>65097309
>this isn't something one has to "realize." this doesn't even really count as subtext given how in-your-face it is.
This is so ridiculously pompous. Of course it's something that most people have to realize, given how few actually have. Any look into the reviews for and discussions about the film will tell you that. And the meta-commentary isn't there just to lend the film an air of self-aware importance, it's intended to both introduce the millennials to what's happening, and to lend a sense of mythic importance to the cyclical story. It justifies the fact that it's a remake by doing this.
>>65097273
> cultural osmosis
Jesus Christ dude, what are you even saying? This is like reading a Pitchfork review. I feel bad because I loved this movie and some of the stuff you said holds up, but this is just ridiculous. You really need to step away from the keyboard and stop pulling these embarrassing stunts. You shouldn't try to argue for something's validity by using vague context based buzzwords. This whole comment is just so massively unimportant and flashy.
>>65097478
you don't have to "introduce" millennials to fucking Star Wars. this isn't some like recently unearthed discovery lost the the sands of time. it's a fucking remake. just because it's a pretentious self-important remake doesn't mean it's a good movie.
>>65097368
>you've decided to sperg out with your rolodex of artists to try to prove some kind of point
No you haven't. Point to the thread where I did.
>to explain why it is that everyone who listens to music you deem obscure is posturing.
The reaction this>>65096365 elicits actually proves my point. Which is that conventional (and this isn't a pejorative) taste is so scoffed at that no one would telegraph to the world that they, fucking gasp, actually enjoyed Bitte Orca when it came out, or that they think that Marquee Moon is guitar music at it's best. No one listing their shitty Pavement or Sonic Youth-derivative band would dare actually list Pavement or Sonic Youth, despite the fact that they're better examples of the genres than anything else they could come up with. It's a fucking affectation. The fact we need chart threads proves that it's simply a means of showing off.
>>65097608
this only applies when people like pop music that was released on bandcamp. for every derivative ripoff indie act, there are tons of really accomplished acts that have gone unheralded and under-appreciated. particularly in "artsier" genres, there are lots of folks who are very well-known within their own genre scene but are unknown on /mu/. my issue isn't with you attacking whatever flavor of the month bandcamp release makes it into someone's chart, and i agree with you that those people are stupid. my issue is with you pushing the poseurcore meme onto people who are just into different genres than you are that tend to go under-reported and thus have more obscure releases.
>>65097517
>cultural osmosis
Pretty common term, my friend.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_osmosis
It just means what people have gathered about Star Wars through social interaction rather than by actually watching the movies.
>>65097522
You'd be surprised how many haven't seen the movies. They've only familiar with it through the games, tv shows, or general cultural osmosis.
>>65097517
How is cultural Osmosis a buzzword?
It exists, most people born in the last 20 years haven't seen a Mickey Mouse cartoon but that doesn't mean they don't who he is.
>>65095024
Any of Ferrnow's projects are always solid
>>65094228
Based scaruffi
>>65096436
>minimalism in popular music has never been about creating compositions with the depth of the works by John Adams or Steve Reich.
None of those anons, but you're approaching the regime of the "x is good because it did these things but was still popular" argument. Are you defining popular music as "music primarily stored in recorded form, rather than written form"? Because then there are many examples of popular music that do, in fact, contain minimal compositions with the depth of the works by John Adams or Steve Reich. Are you defining popular music as "music that has sold enough records/gotten enough views on youtube, etc"? Then there is no artistic relevance to the fact that they are "popular".
>>65097648
I've been posting here for years, and while this place has generally had a hard on for underground music, particularly when last.fm was more of a thing, it's never actually been this bad. It's gotten to the point where people can't even discuss the Beatles or /mu/-core bands like Radiohead and Animal Collective without the tastemakers coming out to call you a pleb, or to claim that the only good album the band put out happens to be their most disliked and/or obscure album. It's the Scaruffication of this board's sensibilities. It's gross and immature, and death for the people whose criteria for quality isn't fashion or obscurity.
>>65097814
Not gonna get into a semantics argument. You know exactly what I mean by popular music, and how it's distinct from art music not in terms of quality, but in terms of complexity. There are pop sensibilities and doing well at appealing to those, and art sensibilities and doing well at appealing to those. Some acts can appeal to elements of both.
>>65097892
But you're not considering the multitude of acts that have direct and immediate composition structures that can be associated with pop, but maintain or exceed the sonic complexity of modern "art music". Radiohead does not hold up to these acts (though at least Yorke readily admits to being influenced by krautrock, Stereolab, etc.).
>>65097816
Evidently you've barely read Scaruffi's reviews or lists, since he generally rates an artist's most popular album as their best, likes AnCo, likes two Beatles and Radiohead albums apiece...
in rainbows is goat radiohead if u disagree your a buttblasted faggot
I can't believe this thread triggered a tripfag so much that he's still on here after several hours trying to defend the crumbs that remain of his image.
Can we please go back to talking Scaruffi? Fuck off jmdfys, I don't care for you dude, but seeing you insist on selfishly making yourself the centre of attention of a thread that didn't remotely involve you, only to defend your internet persona on an anonymous board, is getting tiring.
Say what you will about Scaruffi and his contrarian taste, at least he's out there seeing the world and lecturing Ivy Leagues instead of defending his music taste against strangers on the internet like an insecure high schooler.
>>65098379
In what world is Amnesiac Radiohead's most popular album? Where is Here Comes The Indian more popular than Merriweather Post Pavilion?
>But you're not considering the multitude of acts that have direct and immediate composition structures that can be associated with pop, but maintain or exceed the sonic complexity of modern "art music".
This is a useless discussion. Radiohead isn't as sonically complex as other experimental bands that can be described as pop in a general sense, therefore my point that pop acts who borrow from art music tend to not be as compositionally complex as art music no longer stands? You're extrapolating a hard rule from my general remark.
>Radiohead does not hold up to these acts
In what sense? Are those acts able to appeal to as wide and diverse an audience? Can those acts write pop melodies that are as memorable?
>>65098509
Buddy, all but one of my posts is a reply to someone replying to me or discussing me. I didn't make myself the center of attention. And Scaruffi is charlatan whose status on this board amounts to little more than a meme.
>>65094289
Hahahahaha everybody laugh at the stupid retard hahahahaha
>>65094734
yah
>>65098592
i believe in you
>>65094228
New Andy Stott was wack
>>65095255
Oh my God you're a massive faggot
>>65096524
i like u more and more with every post u make my man
>>65094228
>yfw Scruffy makes Views partrician
>>65098554
>In what world is Amnesiac Radiohead's most popular album? Where is Here Comes The Indian more popular than Merriweather Post Pavilion?
He ties Amnesiac with OK Computer, which is the most popular Radiohead album in many worlds. He ranks STGSTV as the best Anco album, not Here Comes the Indian. All I'm saying is you're wrongly associating an excellent (by rock standards) critic with idiots on /mu/.
>therefore my point that pop acts who borrow from art music tend to not be as compositionally complex as art music no longer stands?
You justified Radiohead's relative lack of complexity by stating that they are an act of popular music. There are plenty of popular music acts that do not lack complexity, yet are still as accessible and substantial on the surface/"pop" level as Radiohead, so the justification does not stand. It's not semantics.
>Can those acts write pop melodies that are as memorable?
They can indeed write melodies that are just as memorable. In all honesty, I wouldn't know if they qualify as "pop melodies".
>>65099402
He probably likes Amnesiac best, OKC is a 7 now but it was originally a 6.5
Literally who? I don't understand why people flock to a tabloid for their confirmation bias.
If you like it, who gives a fuk
>>65094228
hahaha he liked the new woods album
pleb
>best of rock
>andy stott
>>65094806
honestly the new autechre project
>>65100579
I'm pretty sure Scaruffi only acknowledges three varieties of music: classical, jazz and rock.
He's such a bad writer, opinions notwithstanding.
>>65094228
H Y P E D
>>65100693
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDii69YCh_Q
>>65094289
kys fgt
>>65094228
yes papa piero shove the reviews up my ass
>>65095323
>2016
>not realizing scaruffi has good opinions too
