Album Rating: 2.0

Allow me to clarify: absurd length in terms of the musical context. This is dragged out for far too long with too little intrigue to add. In that way it is absurd because it demands considerable attention for a good amount of time without offering much.



Considering I regularly defend people who try to make long albums and many of my 5s are over 50 minutes or an hour, it's a bit silly to allege I'm unable to focus on anything, but whatever helps fit your arguments I guess.

Album Rating: 2.5

I gotchu back Mars

Album Rating: 4.5

'it demands considerable attention for a good amount of time...'



hahaha ON NOOOOOO. HUurrrrry up I got breakfast pics to post on Instagram



'...Without offering much' Yeah I get ya



'Considering I regularly defend people who try to make long albums and many of my 5s are over 50 minutes or an hour, it's a bit silly to allege I'm unable to focus on anything, but whatever helps fit your arguments I guess.'



Sorry I should have studied all your fives ,googled their length and gone through every post youve made to see if youve ever contradicted that statement I do apoligise.



For real ,I get what youre saying though. Jesus ANYTHING is a slog if you don't like it no matter the length.

For me theres actually plenty to go back to over that hour that I didnt pick up on first couple of spins. That makes me perfectly fine with the length as you yourself will attest to if you regularly like albums of similar length.

If you arent interested in it theres less chance its going to grow on you because you cant be arsed sitting through it for another whole hour. Theres less playback value if you're not feeling it and its that 'long'.

Album Rating: 2.0

"Sorry I should have studied all your fives ,googled their length and gone through every post youve made to see if youve ever contradicted that statement I do apoligise."



Not what I meant, but you could have perhaps thought of what you were typing first before sliding in a petty insult.



"Theres less playback value if your not feeling it and its that long."



Which was exactly my point. I have no qualms over anyone finding this entertaining/engrossing/etc., but I think it falls flat due to the lack of substance and general absence of variety. It is absurd for me to devote a sizable time span to something that doesn't reap any benefits, which I understand I wasn't necessarily clear about earlier, but now I believe I've explained my reasoning.

Album Rating: 4.0

what lack of substance

Album Rating: 4.5

'sliding in a petty insult'



Merely a friendly jibe. Man up.



'Which was exactly my point.'



I know thats why I reasoned with it x

Album Rating: 4.5



'what lack of substance'



[2]

Album Rating: 2.0

Basically just her voice, occasional piano hits and droning ambiance, abrasive instrumentation appearing sparsely to punctuate climaxes. Stretch that out and it scatters those already few highlights, leaving just the voice for the most part. And as impressive as she can be, her delivery can be monotonous, sometimes because of how she chooses to utter phrases rather than a question of her range.

yea this is about as structurally uninteresting as an album can get

Album Rating: 4.5

That gargling shit she does on this on one of the tracks was pretty lol like

Album Rating: 4.0

nah it's pretty effective

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

"Basically just her voice, occasional piano hits and droning ambiance, abrasive instrumentation appearing sparsely to punctuate climaxes."



Man, if you reduce an hour of music to a meaningless statement like that then you can make anything sound plain. Take the vast majority of all metal. You could just say "Basically just his voice (WAY more limited and monotonous than on this album, but whatever), occasional solos and droning riffs, ablative acoustic instrumentation appearing sparsely to punctuate atmosphere."

I think I had lingua ignota at a restaurant. It was expensive

Album Rating: 4.0

I gave yo girl my lengua ignota

Album Rating: 2.0

"Man, if you reduce an hour of music to a meaningless statement like that then you can make anything sound plain"



I don't think I've reduced it though. There are really very few factors involved here besides her voice, which is the inarguable focal point of this album. Her stylistic choices, layering, harmonies, etc. are all key, as well as the emotion she attempts to convey through those means.



If I sounded unenthusiastic then that's due to how this felt very unremarkable to me. As far as I'm concerned it can indeed be described that way without really subtracting things.

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

"the throat singing is neither here nor there - has all the impact of her rehearsing or warming up her voice to me. it's bollocks lets be honest."



Tbh Doof you brought the throat singing up.... In literally the very first comment on this review.... It sounds weird but that's literally what throat singing is.... It's not some Vashti Bunyan-esque portrayal of beauty. Also it's weird how you criticise lack of vocal technique / ranges etc. and then criticise her for doing unique vocal performances.

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

"I don't think I've reduced it though. There are really very few factors involved here besides her voice, which is the inarguable focal point of this album. Her stylistic choices, layering, harmonies, etc. are all key, as well as the emotion she attempts to convey through those means."



That's literally, unarguably what happened, actually. Whether it was justified or not (subjective opinion either way so it doesn't really matter), that was a reductionist comment. Hence why my restructuring of your comment to describe the majority of metal makes sense while also being completely reductionist and wrong. Is it really a surprise that there's a focal point in a musical album? It's the same thing as a metal band having riffs be the main feature, or vocals be the main feature. There is literally no difference other than you don't like what's on display.



Also while I agree the vocals are a focal point on this album, that doesn't mean that they're the majority of the music. The majority of what is on this album is instrumental / atmospheric stuff entirely devoid of any vocal performance.

Album Rating: 4.0

just her way of doing it is WRONG apparently



"no artistic impact or merit" the fuck

Album Rating: 2.5

Send her to Tibet so she can learn from the masters of throat singing.

Album Rating: 2.0

"That's literally, unarguably what happened, actually. Whether it was justified or not (subjective opinion either way so it doesn't really matter), that was a reductionist comment. Hence why my restructuring of your comment to describe the majority of metal makes sense while also being completely reductionist and wrong. Is it really a surprise that there's a focal point in a musical album? It's the same thing as a metal band having riffs be the main feature, or vocals be the main feature. There is literally no difference other than you don't like what's on display.



Well I'm gonna argue that inarguable claim, because there is little else except her voice, which must do all the work. Depending on what 'metal' you are attempting to describe in your counter, you are in fact the one reducing; in the case of an album like, say, The Long Procession, there are numerous layers to unpack both musically, vocally, and thematically (atmosphere, mood, etc.)



I never said it was a 'surprise' it was the main point. I stressed that it was the central focus because it dominates each song--songs that do not have much else happening in the instrumental department--and is placed up-front and center by the production. Whatever atmosphere is crafted owes itself largely to those vocals. Everything surrounds it to an incredible extent rather than cooperate with it.