Album Rating: 4.5

You claim not be a conservative, but you use the term SJW unironically? Really dude...

i honestly kinda like the guy

sorry for the memes

Album Rating: 4.5

I'm going to leave my comments up for everyone else's enjoyment, or as Johnny defined it: "posterity". Also, I still really like this new Ulcerate record; as it stands it's AOTY, and I cannot imagine this will change any time soon.

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

ALBUM RULES LIKE EXPECTED.



INVERSION IS THE BEST TRACK ok thanks

Album Rating: 4.5

Inversion's riffs are ... delicious, so delicious.

I'm gonna miss that dude. Fuck you reporter.

"prole"
Is it the classism that got him banned? who knows.

What were his last posts? I missed them.

Album Rating: 4.5

@Ghandhi: Something along the lines of arguing that there are universal biologically determined standards for liking music, readily observable across all cultures, which are reducible to harmonic and melodic relationships. Thus making more harmonic and melodic music superior to music that isn't (or something along those lines), therefore proving that music's quality can be, at least to a certain extent, measured. He basically argued more generally for the social darwinist equivalent of cultural universalism.

It really felt like debating a bloody Jordan Peterson stan there at the end. He offered no evidence of course (besides a wikipedia article); he sort of just postulated the truth his beliefs, with barely any arguments to back them up.

P.S. nocte took screen shots of the entire conversation I think.

Album Rating: 4.5

I mean I love dense and complex music like Ulcerate and I sure as fuck ain't no big brain

Never understood where people get off thinking that

Album Rating: 4.5

lIStenIng tO TeCHNical mUsic = 1000 IQ!!!

Album Rating: 4.7 | Sound Off

I quoted parts and parcels. I didn't really weigh into the shit that was clearly off topic.

Did he not mention music theory at least once? How boring.

Album Rating: 4.0

Are there any interviews from Mike or Paul? I mean I like Jamie and what he has to say but Id love to get their perspective on the band.

Album Rating: 4.0

lol that vast troll deleted all comments dam rip

Album Rating: 4.0

"Exactly, I don't believe there have been many truly innovative vocal techniques in most genres of music. The whisper pop of Lana Del Ray and Eilish is a trend that is just as "innovative" as death growls."



just to expand on this: something particularly interesting about this is that in some of their songs, the whisper pop vocals somewhat disregard melodic tone. actually, multiple mainstream pop songs have been moving away from the idea that a good vocal melody is the most important part of a pop song.



which is downright bizarre and could have been unthinkable just a few years back, really.

Album Rating: 4.5

fuck this thread

Album Rating: 4.0

damn, the last album that kept a 4.6 this deep was either Vektor or David Bowie. will be fun to see if its staying power is more Koi No Yokan or Opeth at Royal Albert.

Album Rating: 4.5

Weird seeing MementoMori argue with himself against someone whose posts have disappeared, but I love talking aesthetic philosophy (and philosophy in general), so lemme throw this out there and see if anyone wants to take the bait.



Can there be objectivity when judging music? The first problem is defining the terms themselves, and I've noticed in these discussions people seem to be using very different definitions. So let's analyze the subject under different definitions:



"Objective" = "Outside the mind" and "Subjective" = "Inside the mind." From this definition, it's clear that what's objective about music are the actual acoustic vibrations at various frequencies at certain temporal intervals. These are "objective" insofar as it's information detected by our sense of hearing and doesn't change based on how we feel/think. Meanwhile, any judgment or reaction to that music must either come from our minds, and whether we're appealing to our own individual reaction/feelings/standards or those of others is irrelevant to that.



"Objective" = "Communal/Universal" and "Subjective" = "Individual." Under this definition, judgment of music becomes objective only insofar as we're appealing to communally defined standards of quality. This is similar to judging good/bad in sports where we communally create/agree upon rules, and then judge performance relative to those rules.



Perhaps a tangential issue is where the "communal/universal" standards come from. My stock answer is that they're a mix of near-universal qualities created by billions of years of evolution producing humans with very similar brains, mixed with differences as dictated by differing societies, cultures, and times. To take an example, tonality is almost universally appealing because it's a system that enables pattern-finding, which almost all human brains take pleasure in (music is little more than patterned sound anyway); and it allows enables artists to creative divert from that patterning to create "surprise," which is the opposite of pattern that human brains also find pleasure (and often displeasure) in.



That's good enough for now.

Dog shite tastes awful

Album Rating: 4.5

RE Whisper pop, it's also worth noting that neither Lana nor Billie can claim that particular innovation either. That goes back at least to Hope Sandoval and Mazzy Star, and I'd be willing to wager there's probably some artist/band before her/them that were doing it too. One of the appealing things about microphones in pop music is the ability to use the full dynamic range of the human voice without worrying about having to be heard over live instruments, and I'm sure someone before the 90s realized this meant they could whisper.