Other bands whose sole talent is mindless and boring repetition?

>>70261920
Tool

>>70261939
nailed it

Are trolls considered artists? Because OP himself's the best fit for the what's being asked here.

>>70262231
>troll
>2017

>>70262231
Is he not right tho?

this is correct. i listened to the entire album straight and it was fucking painful to listen to. the sole purpose of swans is so pathetic little fuccbois can namedrop them to impress transboys and art hoes

lightning bolt
brainbombs

>>70262889
nah it's a grower brah

>>70261920
>>70262962
there are literally millions

>>70261920
tru, only revival swans tho

>>70261920
Swans is fucking boring, and I listen to drone. Every song from their last couple releases is essentially the exact same formula of a single short riff being repeated and built upon texturally, for 10+ minutes at a time. This would be fine, but Swans insist on doing this for well over an hour each time. It just becomes painful and mindnumbing to listen to.

>>70263029
This.

>>70263209
It depends on the song. Mother of the World is stretched out to 2-3 minutes longer than it should be before the real song starts also...
this is gonna sound weird but It'll make sense to a Stars of the Lid fan... some of it kinda gets you into an almost meditative or dreaming like state. The Glowing Man especially.
From The Seer to The Glowing Man, they slowly went from an experimental post-rock band with interesting textures working off their legacy, to something a little more... vaguely spiritual and meditative in a somewhat intense way with serious flares of the kind of consciousness expansion stuff Syd Barrett was doing on Piper at the Gates of Dawn.

>>70261939
Tool makes enjoyable quality tunes though

>>70262889
>implying swans shouldn't be a pain to listen to

>>70263891
>2017
>people unironically believe this

This album is a grower. Anyone who says Swans are boring are most definitely trolls, because that's just impossible.

>>70263209
>Every song from their last couple releases is essentially the exact same formula of a single short riff being repeated and built upon texturally, for 10+ minutes at a time
Except this isn't true, there are only a couple of songs between the three albums which follow that pattern.

>Swans insist on doing this for well over an hour each time.
Their longest song is 34 minutes and even that is made up of about four or five different sequences. Their longest single sequences are only about ten minutes.

>>70264908
not him but
>what is exaggeration for comedic purposes

>>70264226
Post-reuinion Swans are boring.
I listen to music many times more minimal than them, but the way they do it is uninteresting.
So it's not what they do, but the way they do it.

Cardiacs

What is AC/DC.

anyone else getting tired of repetitive music? seems like pitchfork and other web taste creators favor these artists that heavily utilize repetition to create a trance like effect but i'm getting bored of it. I need some variation. Don't get me wrong I think it is a valid way of creating music but it seems overplayed.

>>70264939
What are you talking about? That post isn't remotely comic in any respect.

>>70265068
It's been Swans' thing since the 80s. What other artists are you referring to?

>>70265088

Maybe the problem is just that I've been listening to a lot of music that follows that pattern but from my point of view it's everywhere. All of Krautrock, stuff like LCD Soundsystem, Talking Head's Remain in Light. All have this common theme of building upon a single perpetual groove. I wish I could find more music that varies itself more while still staying true to the quintessence of the song.

>>70263716
Not really Syd Barret, more like Krautrock or avantgarde post punk, like Can and This Heat

>>70265112
Those really aren't bands I'd associate with heavy repetition (obviously excepting Krautrock). Also they are predate the 'web taste creators' you're talking about.

>>70265130

this is true