Album Rating: 3.0
Yeah, lots of varied ratings and opinions to add perspective.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
People are confining themselves to the objective way of thinking that flow is a conventional factor in making an album 'good'
I subscribe to the notion that the brain in itself being a purveyor of irrational thought complexes and therefore derives pleasure from the non conventional. Hence why jazz is so heralded.
Do I fit into yank brat sput club yet dudes? Do I need more nonsensical drivel?
|
| |
"There certainly is objectivity in music - how complex or inventive the melodies or harmonies or arrangements are, quality of performance/technical skills, the quality of production, mixing, etc. The subjectivity is in how you weigh those different aspects and in how the overall product makes you feel."
This is objectively wrong.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
I get lowkey scared for the human capacity to think for oneself when an Opeth thread or whatever is just "5.0 such a classic, love the bit where the guitar comes in m/" over and over and over
|
| |
I'm gonna 1 Patton's discog to keep you on your toes.
Except Angel Dust I'll leave that at a 5.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
King for a day is better.
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
Objectively
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
wrong
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
Disagree, but all three Bungle albums and Delirium Cordia are better
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
Back on topic, I think Zak has made some excellent points. There is an established mode of music criticism that has fairly rigid paradigms of good and bad flow, production, musicianship, narrative, lyrics, etc etc etc.
An album could adhere to all of the right conventions, and I might think it blows. Similarly, an album could spurn all of those conventions, and be the best thing ever. So I just try to take albums on their own terms.
In the context of this album, the 'objectively bad flow' doesn't bug me at all, and I would even go so far as to say it works in its favour, exposing the stylistic contrasts from one track to the next. It is a welcome departure from something like In Rainbows, which has immaculate focus but a narrower sonic palette.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
I can't really complain about the flow on here because all the tracks sound virtually the same to me other then Burn the Witch.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
You do make really good arguments Poly
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
lol
|
| |
Boney is correct. Also Flagot u give yourself way more credit than is due. Let's not forget the Corona episode.
Also poly did indeed make a good case. The only good xase
|
| |
In regards to his last point there tho I can see that for the first half of the album but there is no contrast between the last like 4 songs at all
|
| |
Also lmao "flagot"... that was a phone autocorrect
|
| |
New nickname for sure tho
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
lol
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
beautiful to be sure
|
| |
He's gonna get a razor snowball for that.
|
| |
|
|
