It finally clicked.

25 years after its release

nice work, anon

>>68665498
Wow did you listen to it as soon as it released?

>>68665508
fuck yeah I did, you pleb

>>68665524
Get off mu old man

>>68665453
I think this one and souvlaki are the only two shoegaze albums to have clicked for me sadly. although i've been listening to lsd and the search over and over

>>68665498
>>68665508

>Not listening to it as it live as it was being recorded

Fucking plebs

>>68665564
>not fathering every member of MBV with your patrician seed

god damn plebs GET OFF MY BOARD

>>68665560
I like how LSD and the search for god are like a mix of beach house and slowdive, but im bummed they dont have much actual material out

>liking Loveless

You are all pleb here.

File: jeb!.png (524KB, 852x433px) Image search: [Google]

524KB, 852x433px

>>68665453
Congrats... You will be old enough to drive next year too!

>>68665453
Nowhere is better

>>68665752
Kek

Same.

>>68665453
Why not talk about this in /shugazi/?
>>68650743

protip: its actually clicked when you realise soon is the best track
plebs who have only listened to it like less that 50 times will say shit like to here knows when and i only said

How do I get this album to "click" for me?

I listen to it, I kinda like it, but there's something I'm missing I feel?
Like, I'm supposed to listen to the album in a way where I can fully realize the "wall of sound"

>>68667754
Listen to it with the lights out with good headphones so you can fully focus on the intricacies of the production. When you try and pick apart the wall of sound, you realize how dense and incredibly well put together it is.

>>68667844
Thanks I'll try that

>>68667871
Hope it works out. When I listened to it in that setting the album went from being one that frustrated me, to being in my top ten of all time.

>>68667871
For about a year after I fist listened to it I thought I understood it fully, I liked the songwriting for the most part, but I kinda felt like all the guitar noise was just covering it up in a way that didn't really add anything.

One day it just clicked, I don't know what it was but it just made sense all of a sudden and now it's in my top 3 favourite albums ever.

I really hope it "clicks" for you eventually like it did for me, but don't try to force it. Maybe it just isn't the right album for you.

>>68667844
>fully focus on the intricacies of the production

Translation: 'convince yourself that the production is intricate'.

Literally any album can 'click' that way, by way of self-conviction that it's good.

>>68668067
>I don't know what it was but it just made sense all of a sudden

Translation: you finally broke before the hype.

I get appreciating music on a sonic level (I listen to a lot of electroacoustic/field recording stuff), but shoegaze in general and Loveless specifically just doesn't seem too interesting to me. Is it "clicking" a matter of just finally understanding that the texture or immersiveness of music can be brilliant in itself, or is there something specific to Loveless that it takes people a while to get?

>>68668106
its monumentally creative in terms of engineering. now, in 2016 where abrasive sounds and untraditional mixing styles are used everywhere, loveless may not seem remarkable but you need to think of the context and time this album is released. i don't think its very mindblowing and its generally pretty overrated. but think of where guitar music was at in the 50s/60s and then the progression to this.

>>68668131
>its monumentally creative in terms of engineering.

This is like saying that a novel is monumentally creative in terms of typesetting.

>>68668088
I despised the album before I gave it another shot in that setting. If you want to debate over personal perceptions of quality go ahead and waste your time.

>>68668167
I simply owe people a reminder that any album will make a stunning impression if you listen to it in darkness, with a suggestion that it is great and a specific desire to convince yourself of it. People like to present this setting as somehow particularly relevant to 'Loveless', but barring cases in which the album is explicitly about summer, just think what doing this would do an album that's already a 10/10. It's basically a cheatcode that gives it a +5.

>>68667733
>plebs who have only listened to it like less that 50 times will say shit like to here knows when and i only said
100+ listens.

To Here Knows When > When You Sleep > Loomer > the rest

>>68668145
not really. audio engineering refers to the recording and mixing of a piece of music.

>>68668783
Precisely.

Typesetting = technical execution of a book irrespective of its writing.

Engineering = technical execution of an album irrespective of its songwriting.

As far as I listened, 'Loveless's' songwriting is slight to nonexistent.

>>68665560
you're like me 4 years ago

listen to sweet trip

>>68665560
Listen to LSD&TSFG EP really stoned in a dark room, and then "give in" to the sound. Trust me.
Also need to hear it at a decent volume. There are a lot of subtler background layers that enhance each track

>>68668774
400+ listens here

To Here Knows When > Sometimes > Loomer > I Only Said > Blown A Wish > What You Want > Soon > Come In Alone > Only Shallow > Touched > When You Sleep

>>68669019
Honestly I'm impressed, I doubt I've listened to any album even 100 times.

>>68669021
I doubt I've listened to any album even 30 times.

>>68669021
Loveless is kind of an exception in that regard. The only track I've maybe worn out is Soon.

Loomer, To Here Knows When, and Sometimes still sound fresh to me.

>>68669019
lmao is this bait

Sometimes
Soon
Only Shallow
When You Sleep
I Only Said
Come In Alone
To Here Knows When
Blown A Wish
What You Want
Loomer
Touched

>>68669019
what you want>sometimes>i only said>come in alone>loomer>to here knows when>blown a wish>only shallow>soon>when you sleep
>touched

>>68669164
>Loomer that far down

Loveless hasn't opened itself up to you yet. Keep listening!

>>68668817
nobody claimed that mbv make compositionally complex songs

ur analogy implies you judge music by the notes used

maybe you should open your mind and not listen to music so literally and focus on the atmosphere and how it makes you feel. just a suggestion.

>>68669193
Translation: 'maybe you should be more open-minded and stop judging a novel by the words it contains, but rather by its packaging'.

Look, I'm not saying I won't appreciate some technical innovation where it's due, but it's clearly dishonest to refer to it as music just to try to steal some spotlight.

>>68668817
>Typesetting = technical execution of a book irrespective of its writing.

What the fuck is the technical execution of a book if not its writing you donkeybrained peb

>>68669249
'Writing' is clearly a metonymy for 'coming up with the content of'.

>>68669221
your writing analogy simply has no weight because sound design is such an integral part of music and "typesetting" isn't. but you clearly wouldn't know that as an album as simple as Loveless goes over ur head. maybe you should read some more books and think about the impact of the prose rather than how complex it is on the surface. it would probably make you a better writer, as well.

>>68665752
I actually started appreciating MBV and shoegaze more after listening to that album
I would say it's the best entry point

>>68669333
>sound design is such an integral part of music

Says anyone who's too much of a brainlet to actually write good songs.

>sound design is an integral part of music
>tableware design is an integral part of cuisine
>accessors are an integral part of a programming interface
>honorifics and greetings are an integral part of communication

Whatever helps you sleep.

>>68665718
underrated post

I've always liked this album. I never had a 'click' moment. It's got some damn catchy hooks.

>>68669403
clearly you know nothing about making music or making anything

your analogies still don't work

>>68669528
>x takes skill
>therefore, x takes no less skill than y

'Loveless' fans' logic.

>>68669268
obviously it wasn't "clearly". If you wanted to be clear you could have said that the quality of the writing has nothing to do with the content of a book instead of typing like a pseudo

>>68665453
>finally
it should've been clicked on a first listen, it's not that hard to get into. literally babby's first shoegaze (that's why it's on /mu/core chart), which is not a bad thing, because it's quite an achievement to make music that is complex enough (in terms of sound or composition) but accessible at the same time

>>68668817
Typesetting only affects the reading experience in a minimal way whereas the production of a piece of music is integral to the entire sound and experience.

>>68669546
I *did* care for clarify, that's why I referred to coming up with substance of the book as 'writing' by way of parallel to song*writing* in the complement of the analogy.

>>68669403
would you rather read sheet music instead of listening to the sounds which it created?

>>68669557
>the production of a piece of music is integral to the entire sound and experience

Says everyone who's too dependent on presence of irrelevant earcandy not to be musically fulfilled by listening to a song's score in MIDI.

>>68669590
ahahahahaha

at least you understand that you are wrong at this point

>>68669585
>>68669590
Ha.


No, and this question further exemplifies 'Loveless' fans' grasp on logic.

Nowhere did I imply that I prefer raw scores to engineered products. I just refuse to do injustice to real musicians and their real, genuine efforts by putting the cart before the horse.

>>68669403

>sound design is not an integral part of music
yeah recipes are the most important part of cuisine, not the food the chef make from them

>>68669606
staying at food analogies, you can have the best steak or any fancy food you can, but without salt and spices it will taste worse than a burger in mcdonalds

>>68669606
Come on brah give it a rest. No one likes an arrogant pseudo.

>>68669616
This doesn't make sense. A recipe hardly never specifies the foods with which to make the dish. It literally says, such-and-such vegetables and spices. And freshness of the components is obviously implied.

What is left outside the specification of the recipe is details such as exact timings in seconds, materials the kitchenware is made of, manner of serving, and such. And those, as a matter of fact, are not important to the end dish, no.

>>68669649
>eating steak with condiments

just fucking plen

>>68669662
>american cuisine

>>68669649
Actually, 'Loveless' is like taking a dish and burying it in salt, so that none of the original nature of the dish is discernible.

>>68665453
It didn't "click", you just Stockholm Syndromed yourself into liking it because you needed to feel validation from a bunch of anonymous nobodies on an American-based Japanese imageboard.

>>68669703
He probably just got mega high and felt the music as waves pulsating throughout his entire body. That's how it clicked for me though. Played it to plebs and they say it's like the CD is scratched.

>>68669164
What You Want > Soon > To Here Knows When > I Only Said > Come In Alone > Sometimes > Loomer > Blown A Wish > Only Shallow > When You Sleep > Touched

^ this is objectively correct

>>68670658
its a shame they've never played What You Want live

I listened to it like 6 times and except a few hooks here and there, it's pretty boring noise. There's nothing wrong with noise, but this album is not exciting or interesting, just repetitive and boring

>>68670658
>soon that high
>sometimes that low

>>68670803
where they belong

File: 1447863015709.gif (2MB, 360x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x240px

>>68670810

>>68669019
about as accurate as you can get desu