Was vaperwave a mistake?

File: excited_child-332101512_std.jpg (68KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 800x1200px

>>68713081
Yay! It's time for my weekly dose of cringies!
more cringies, OP, pweeeeaaase!

Did the Jews do 9/11?

Vaporwave was never a thing.

It was just some word a clueless critic came up with for a shitty Seattle tranny 'artist' who copied elements of the works of more original artists who themselves were only playing with certain aesthetic ideas temporarily and then moved on to other things.

The whole fucking thing was a red herring that clueless internet people fell for. Never listen to critics.

>>68714542
Well, it became a thing but it was never intended to. Other than that you're spot fucking on

>>68714542
maybe not at first but you can't deny it's a legitimate genre now
vaporwave is a clearly defined style of music and there's many artists who make it. it borrows elements from other genres but it's more than those. it's different from chillwave, ambient, downtempo, plunderphonics, synthpop, funk, whatever. i

>>68713081
Internet culture in general was a mistake.

Honestly, the bad things about being alive in 2016 wouldn't be so bad without the internet.

Everything that perplexes and makes you irritated is from the internet, I assure you.

>>68714576
>>68714605
Well yes I'd agree it's just the founding premise was complete uninformed nonsense written by outsiders. It definitely became a formula and got adopted by some internet kids, which was somewhat interesting, but it's best we understand how it actually got started rather than the completely fictional narrative that it was some intentional style based on 'accelerationism' and stuff, all of which a critic completely pulled out of his ass.

WTF is going on in OP's pic. Who are these hateful people?

>>68713081
No, normies are the mistake

>>68714777
Yeah I agree with other net subgenre's (Chillwave and witchhouse) there was a distinct sound. Something tangible Vaporwave on the other hand was at it's core Chopped and screwed music for white kids but grew in to a more aesthetic over sonics type of thing. Making it this blanket term for a wide range of electronic music.

>>68714542
Vaporwave ain't anything new.
Listen to some of Mf Dooms instrumentals and you got vaporwave from ten years before.
Boards of Canada was doing the same shit.

Vaporwave is just hip-hop for white pussies.

>>68715505
In the case of chillwave, hypnagogic, witchhouse, and what would influence vaporwave, all of it grew out of sonic and stylistic play suddenly coming out of the post-noise/drone/psych American underground of the time, which was starting to drift into all kinds of various aesthetic themes, almost like taking on different landscapes.

Things would get really cosmic, or beachy, or witchy, or plastic or digital... like the idea of the cosmic applied to internet logic. And very aesthetics based rather than message/text based.

It's just every time any of the artists drifted onto another object of interest, which triggered a certain style or vibe for a moment, critics (I suppose understandably) would try to name the new vibe as a new genre.

This went back really far with that psychedelic underground. Critics were calling its various iterations "New Weird America"... "Hypnagogic Pop"... "Chillwave"... "Witchhouse"... "Vaporwave" etc., and yet such monikers were often given to the same artists from the same underground scenes over the years. Animal Collective were called New Weird America and Freak Folk, then were associated with Chillwave and tropical / beachy vibes. Lopatin and Ferraro were noise, drone, experimental psych, then 'hypnagogic', 'godfathers of chillwave', 'vaporwave'.

I understand the impulse to want to name these fluctuations in aesthetics, it's just that critics and commentators get too keen on trying to ascribe narratives and intentions and explanations that just aren't there. Part of it is critics always wanting to be up on the 'new thing' and being over eager to name things before they have any understanding or perspective (which they probably will always lack because they don't actually make art themselves or get where it's coming from). But also, critics come from a 'word' culture, they are educated in texts but not aesthetics, and so they approach it too linguistically. Always wanting to read things politically or linearly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdVEez20X_s

>>68713081
*dabs*

>>68714775
>Everything that perplexes and makes you irritated is from the internet, I assure you.

This is so fucking true. I've never run into super pretentious music snobs, SJW's, fedora-clad "nice guys", etc. in real life apart from maybe once or twice.