there is nothing to get or understand here. its literally just some stoner making shitty music with his friends. thats it. why do you underagers pretend otherwise?
>>65766069
Whats shitty about it?
lmao
>>65766092
>>65766097
if you liked itaots pre 2005, thats fine. kind of like weird but whatever. it means you either found it locally and appreciate it through its context or heard of it through friends or something. if you like post 2005, especially post 2010 you probably exclusively like it because you feel like youre "supposed" to.
>>65766069
there is nothing to get or understand here. its literally just some stoner making GOAT music with his friends. thats it.
oh thats right, i forgot you kids like to hide behind walls of irony fantano style in order to dismiss anything that could challenge your shitty hugbox. let me inb4 that
also,
>inb4 you respond ironically to this, especially now that ive pointed this out.
>>65766127
>if you liked itaots pre 2005, thats fine
I bought the album in 1999.
Now answer the question. What's shitty about it?
>>65766127
So your social perceptions are all you have to say?
Op projecting hard here is obviously underage
And to the 2005 guy I heard it at a friends house in 2009 am I cool or not I really need to know
wow you sure are angry
>>65766191
Except you didn't. we both know thats not true, you wouldnt be on /mu/ in 2016 if you did kek
>>65766276
Nope, I did. The cognitive dissonance must be killing you.
>you wouldnt be on /mu/ in 2016 if you did kek
I've been here for some time.
Now answer the question.
>>65766313
Do you even know what that word means
like it literally makes zero sense under the context youre using it.. im just going to assume someone used it on you and now you think it makes sense to use it on me
and no, you wouldnt- odds are very rare you would be. getting it that year suggests you were inclined in a local music scene which in turn suggests you were around 20 as these things often are
so youd be around 35+ now and for some reason despite being tightly knight into a local scene degraded into shitposts on a board that isnt the slightest bit "hip" or possessing of any musical discussion
>inb4 autism
over analytical sure i guess.
It's the flowering of a truly original artist's voice, with Mangum's text, composition, and performances surpassing all preceding efforts; it is the first true rock "concept album" to succeed holistically - and not merely succeed, but flourish - prompting a reexamination of that idiom by many; it's one of the rock music's most artistically significant statements from the 1990s, perhaps even ever.
>>65766409
>Do you even know what that word means
Since I used it correctly in context, I must!
>like it literally makes zero sense under the context youre using it
How so? explain it.
>and no, you wouldnt- odds are very rare you would be
Why?
>so youd be around 35+ now and for some reason despite being tightly knight into a local scene
Correct
>degraded into shitposts on a board that isnt the slightest bit "hip" or possessing of any musical discussion
Show me where I shitposted.
>>65766069
You're the one spamming threads about it every day
>>65766479
no.. you really didnt use it correctly
explain what you meant exactly by it then, maybe you misunderstand its meaning or something
>Show me where I shitposted.
you ignored my other points
if anything is showing cognitive dissonance its literally you claiming to be on mu despite being "in the know" enough to know itaots in 1999
r/indieheads, why do you love to make shit up?
>>65766587
You're a sad cunt
>>65766127
>>65766069
>>65766069
Assuming you are OP, you just answered your own question. It's known and generally accepted that /mu/ is the most underage board full of snowflakes that want to feel unique. And again teens are more impressionable, so they don't see the irony of forcing themselves/"adapting" to like an album they're being told by the popular opinion is very unique and intuitive
Basically they like it because they're told/hold the perception that if they like it, they're unique.
oh look it's another thread where OP shitposts and has literally nothing to say about the music so he resorts to attacking peoples grammar and supposed miswording
>>65766587
>explain what you meant exactly by it then
You have some severe trouble accepting that someone in their 30s is posting on /mu/ and are throwing a little hissy fit because of this.
>you ignored my other points
I addressed them all. You just ignored my request to
1) show me where I shitposted and
2) answer what is shitty about this album.
Is this just misdirection? Can you do it?
>if anything is showing cognitive dissonance its literally you claiming to be on mu despite being "in the know" enough to know itaots in 1999
Now you're getting it!
>r/indieheads
Never been there, sorry.
>>65766685
I don't even like itaots that much, but I see it in the catalog every single day, and it's always the same thread
>>65766685
not ironic
>>65766436
>>65766587
>you ignored my other points
balls to say this when you literally couldn't answer as to why the album is bad
>>65766069
I listened to it around 2010 because I had a friend who went on /mu/ and he talked about it a lot. I enjoyed it. I still do, I like the melodies and I enjoy the lyrics. Ferris Wheel On Fire is better imo but I legit enjoy it. Not everything is a meme, why are you so concerned with what other people like and dislike?
OP is a god-tier baitmaster
