Overrated?

>>69669020
Underrated if anything. If anyone unironically thinks this is overrated they have literal shit taste. Album of the decade by a landslide desu, nothing even comes close.

Underrated

Push the Sky Away was better

I can't get into Nick Cave because I just don't like his voice, I have the same problem with David Bowie

>>69669113
>I just don't like his voice
Are you gay or something

I definitely feel that it's overrated. It's got one of the highest aggregate in terms of ratings/placing in year end lists. But if we take away the legacy of Nick Cave, if we take away muh emotion (subjective; anyone can feel this from even a radio pop song), if we also take away the "his son died" narrative that got attached to this even though the album has nothing to do with it, we get an annoyingly sparse and repetitive album with some pretty good vocal performances but even the vocals lack dynamics through a good part of the album.

Jesus Alone is great, the rest is forgettable

>>69669020
Nah. It's fantastic, and most publications snubbed it out of top 10.

>>69669153
If you take away all that you still have wonderful poetic lyrics, excellent vocal performances (although admittedly lacking in range, the highs are spectacular) and some of the most brilliant instrumentals put on record this year. If you think the instrumentals being "sparse and repetitive" is a negative aspect then I would suggest you don't understand or appreciate drone music.

>The Bad Seeds
>Without Blixa

no thanks.

>>69669153
the 'his son died' narrative is important, as it directly influenced the recording and production of the album. To deny this would be equivalent to denying that Bowie's impending death influenced the recording of Blackstar.

>>69669140
what has that got to do with anything xDxDxDxD

>>69669153
you're acting as if external factors tdon't affect the way we perceive art, don't be such a dumbo

>>69669224
>lyrics
Lyrics aren't a requirement of good music. Having good lyrics around meh music doesn't make it good music, it's just good poetry under meh music.

>If you think the instrumentals being "sparse and repetitive" is a negative aspect then I would suggest you don't understand or appreciate drone music.
Nah I love that type of stuff; I have gone so far as to vehemently defend the tracks on elseq 2 and 3 on Autechre's latest which have been lambasted by others for entailing long 20 minute tracks that just do the same thing over and over again. The key with music that tends to be surface level repetitive though is that the real change is happening at a micro level rather than a macro level. Most of the tracks on this album don't have a lot happening on either level.

>>69669346
>the 'his son died' narrative is important, as it directly influenced the recording and production of the album
No it didn't. By the time Arthur died, the music itself was already done on for Skeleton Tree, and the rest of the time was spent on production stuff like overdubbing/mixing/mastering. Might wanna do some research on this album that you claim to enjoy so much.

>you're acting as if external factors tdon't affect the way we perceive art, don't be such a dumbo
Does that make it right though? We are using non-musical determinants to determine the quality of music. Look at the amount of false praise ANOHNI has gotten for Hopelessness. The themes covered on the album are for sure important, but the music even the lyrics range from mediocre to awful. Beyonce's Lemonade doesn't have an original creative thought put into it, but because of the agenda run behind it, not the music itself (which is ultimately a lot of generic DJ Mustard type stuff with MBDTF Kanye maximal production sprinkled in) that is giving it so much love.

i would say that it's underrated here, but then I realized that most of the people here are teenage hip-hop kids anyways

>>69669764
My bad, forgot to put you in this post>>69669764

>>69670177
>RAP
>Retards Attempting Poetry
Anti hip hop meme stuff like the above gets posted here all the tie wtf are you on about?

>>69669764
>>69670078
God I suck at this.

>>69670078
look at it this way, there are certain albums you'll only appreciate fully when you're in a certain mood. i mean, this'll probably get a lot of hate, especially here, but this just shows how subjective music taste is, when even relatively minor factors in your life can affect how you appreciate it.

>>69669153

Everything sounds much shittier when stripped of its context.

>>69670374
Yeah, but at the same time, I feel that just because you or anyone likes something doesn't necessarily make it good. My personal example with this is the entire 90s Eurodance scene. Very repetitive, very simple, very cliche/formulaic, but I love it. It's my personal "get me in a good mood" music. But I won't at the same time pretend that it's some kind of amazing artistic achievement.

Not to mention once we get more into the subjectivity side of things, that just makes this topic itself that much more obsolete. I personally think that there's a subjective side to it (what you see with how people's tastes are with music everywhere), but there's also an objective side to it (like legitimate critical analysis of the music itself and what it entails.)

>>69670429
Depends on if the context is musical or something outside it. Exogenous context is ultimately a delusion used to give justification on enjoying music. It's why non-Christian people can enjoy Mass In B Minor, it's why a bevy of various emotions can be felt from most art music pieces that stay away from this crap and keep it just about the music, and the context of something can't always be something that will be agreed upon (ex. Arghoslent makes excellent melodic death in the contextual themes of white supremacy but nobody gives a shit the music is great, classic early 90s hip hop groups did similar stuff with Public Enemy referencing Black Panthers and Wu Tang/ex Wu Tang guys referencing Five Percenter stuff yet people often just distort those contexts to instead say "they were just fighting for black equality rights not essentially black supremacy")

The idea of giving music outside meaning through completely unrelated non-music is ridiculous and doesn't make any sense because none of these contexts are ultimately real and anyone can interpret the music as anything.

>>69669153
>if we take away what makes it good, then it isn't good anymore!

fucking kys

>>69669020
I barely see it in AOTY threads. When it shows up critics' lists it's usually no where near the top either, and is sandwiched between the usual derivative indie drivel and trendy shit hop.

Anyway, I don't really care that this album isn't getting meme'd into oblivion on /mu/. It's one of the few albums in the past decade that I could see myself revisiting throughout my life, it's rare that I have this kind of emotional connection with an album.

worst of the "blackstar" ripoff albums this year. even deathly hollow is 10x better

>>69670650
''good'' is such a bullshit term, there's nothing inherently good about something, there's just what you enjoy, and what you enjoy is what's good, for you, at least.

JUST BREATHE, JUST BREATHE

I NEEED YOOOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Rings of Saturn is SOTY

>>69670698
Might wanna reread that post, then after that pay attention to the rest of the topic.

>>69670971
To a certain extent I agree in that there's definitely some level of subjectivity, but to go in that totally subjective approach that you're trying to do it with (at least in what I think) isn't the best approach. If we totally give into our subjectivity like the way you are talking about, we limit what we are able to perceive and process out of things not just music. I am pretty sure some of the more relatively abrasive things people like here didn't like those type of things on their first try. Many who found out about Trout Mask Replica from here for example wouldn't have given the thought of giving the album replays so they can ultimately get "enjoyment" out of it if they only went by what you're saying.

>>69671324
How do you objectively measure the quality of music? Whether something is "good" or "bad"?

>>69671324
>Many who found out about Trout Mask Replica from here for example wouldn't have given the thought of giving the album replays so they can ultimately get "enjoyment" out of it if they only went by what you're saying.
Whether or not someone gets enjoyment out of an album on their first listen is completely subjective and varies from person to person
What point are you trying to make?

>>69671474
See, it's not that simple though. It's more of a case of actually understanding and processing than saying good or bad. Not gonna lie I am not the best equipped to do this discussion cuz I gotta study for finals, so I guess I'll just give an example.

There's a person who says that they like *insert artist here* because they think they are good, or they say that they like it because of how the music makes them feel. It's all vague and shallow stuff that ultimately won't fit the perspective of others around you.

Then you have someone who likes the music and wonders what or why they like it. They would be like "yo this is my jam because *insert qualities/quantifiers of the music itself*". Here it's more about describing what's going on in the music, so even if there's another person who doesn't share the same view and disagrees on liking the music, it still makes sense why the person thinks it's good. If this person listens to something in a similar genre of what he likes, but doesn't like it, he's also able to describe what it is that's happening here that he doesn't like elsewhere.

Basically saying that being able to look at what's actually going on and come to a conclusion from that makes for a more valid and precise reason as to why something's liked. It's looking at something objectively to actually come to an ultimately subjective conclusion.

So like with the Trout Mask Replica example the first person would go "eh this sucks I am out." The second person will figure out why he's not a fan, notice that it might be because of perceived abrasiveness that is more a result of his past experiences that isn't used to such abrasiveness, then maybe give it multiple listens to get past that abrasiveness, then figure out whether or not he actually likes the record or not.

There's nothing wrong with that other completely subjective way of thinking, but I feel that considering we are music fans, and we, you know, like music, we analyze the music.

>>69671582
>Whether or not someone gets enjoyment out of an album on their first listen is completely subjective and varies from person to person
Cool, but that wasn't my point, I specified my particular grouping to be the people that didn't know of TMR without 4chan, those that went into it and not initially liking it, then giving it relistens to "get it" on the suggestions of others not they themselves.

Even then, getting enjoyment or feeling used to a certain thing has more to do with environment than with subjectivity so for example a kid having grown up with free jazz may not have a problem with Trout Mask Replica.

>What point are you trying to make?
>>69671836 that with a little bit of looking at things objectively, we can make a more informed subjective decision that helps us understand and grow more. The completely subjective viewpoint feels antiquated and close minded in comparison.