Post musicians that deserve more appreciation from /mu/

u1stop

stop

(I'm taking the bait)
Yes the artist that's spammed on every other thread and has been (weakly) compared to Bjork, David Bowie, and fucking Beethoven clearly needs more appreciation.

>>70658105
She seems so hated by /mu/. People need to let their stupid biases behind and appreciate her music for what it is.

stop being such shills to grimes

>>70659616
No

File: 1485623775946.png (824KB, 537x742px) Image search: [Google]

824KB, 537x742px

>>70658058
Lana del Fat

grimesposting should be punishable by death 2bh

>>70658058
God Grimes fucking sucks

>>70660104
>>70660125
Stop

File: 1485482123385.jpg (47KB, 620x387px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 620x387px

>>70658175
We appreciate her music for what it is. Trash.

>>70660320
In fucking deed.

>>70660320
btfo

>>70660320
>>70660371
>claims not to care
>falls for an obvious b8 thread
Lol

>>70660320
/thread

>>70658175
The only people that are biased are Grimes' fanboys.

>>70660419
see
>>70660413

>>70660413
its not bait dude. They've been here for like a whole fucking year now. GrimesAIDS isnt an "ignore it and itll go away" problem.

>>70660413
lol

>>70660437
lol

>>70660320
>>70660371
>>70660404
>>70660419
>>70660452
Not so quickly, plebs. Not so quickly. Trash? Now prove it. Or gtfo.

>>70660320
>Don't Care
>actually cared
This idiot did it

>>70660452
>They've been here for like a whole fucking year
We've been here in force approximately 8 months, actually, and like I said here >>70660413 - this is an obvious b8 thread (there is NO way that an artist who gets as much attention - good or bad - as she does can be seriously said to be underappreciated on /mu.)

File: 1481715078007.png (5KB, 467x87px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 467x87px

>>70660452
>They've been here for like a whole fucking year now.
Look at this delusional imbecile! Grimesposting exists since at least 2011. She became popular in 2012.

>>70660594
A little subtlety here: attention =/= appreciation.

>>70660566
I have never listened to any of her music and came away from it with anything other than wholehearted distain. I've even taken up your little "challenge" before and offered point by point explanations of what it was specifically that I didn't care for within her music, and you weebs didn't read them. So just for the record, I am thoroughly finished with listening to grimes' music. I have given her more than her fair due, and I have absolutley zero interest in ever hearing any of her music ever again. What was it specifically that I didn't care for within those songs? I couldn't tell you, they were so spectacularly mediocre and underwhelmimg that they utterly failed to leave any kind of notable impression on me. I'm not even sure I could tell you the names of any of them (that is somewhat of a lie, I know I've heard kill v maim and genesis, but I don't really remember specifically how they go or anything, but again, just to reiterate, I will not be revisiting them.)

>>70660644
>attention =/= appreciation.
On /mu, attention = appreciation. 'Tis a strange wrinkle in the workings of discussion forums dominated by contrarians.

>>70660714
>On /mu, attention = appreciation.
That's weird desu

>>70660679
>they utterly failed to leave any kind of notable impression on me.
And yet you felt compelled to write up an entire paragraph expressing your critique of them despite your claim that you don't even remember what they sounded like... or whether you actually listened to them at all.

>>70658058
Stop avoiding my filters.

>>70660679
Just curious, what do you usually listen to? Maybe your music taste is not compatible with her style.

>I have never listened to any of her music and came away from it with anything other than wholehearted distain
What kind of mind do you have if some genuinely beautiful songs (e.g. Symphonia IX) make you so bitter? Maybe you're just not used to beautiful music. Think about it.

>>70660756
>That's weird desu
Weird, but true. People don't waste their time talking about things which they don't truly care about.

>>70660809
>Just curious, what do you usually listen to? Maybe your music taste is not compatible with her style.
It's freaking synthpop. There's nothing to get. It's not like she's an avant-garde composer.

>>70660785
I dont understand what the point you're trying to make is

What I'm saying is that I've played your dumb little "prove it" game before and it always just ends in futility, the only difference is that I end up having to actually listen to a grimes song or two. I'm done doing that. I have no interest in listening to any of her music, ever again.

File: 1477766362391.jpg (2MB, 2487x3730px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2487x3730px

>>70660835
But these so called haters seem very affected negatively by her music. e.g. >>70660679 "wholehearted distain". Could you explain this interesting phenomenon?

>>70660828
>Maybe you're just not used to beautiful music.
Ok, I thought about it, that's really fucking stupid. Have you ever considered that, due to tastes being subjective and relative, something you might consider beautiful, someone else might consider to be dog shit? Think about it!

File: 100.jpg (829KB, 2076x2097px) Image search: [Google]

829KB, 2076x2097px

f(x)

File: Another_Green_World.jpg (33KB, 494x483px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 494x483px

>>70660922
>Maybe you're just not used to beautiful music.
It's not like we're discussing Brian Eno's art rock albums here. That's what I think of when beautiful music is mentioned.

>>70660850
Well, her music isn't just synthpop.

>There's nothing to get.
Apparently there is a lot to get. She's not an avantgarde composer but she used some avant-garde features in her music. Hear for yourself - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy3FPRaeW3Y

This is not your ordinary synthpop. I bet you never heard something like this before. Prove me wrong.

>>70660828
>Just curious, what do you usually listen to? Maybe your music taste is not compatible with her style.
There's nothing to get, it's synthpop. And it's not like she's an avant-garde composer.

>>70660922
>Have you ever considered that, due to tastes being subjective and relative, something you might consider beautiful, someone else might consider to be dog shit? Think about it!
Bingo! You got it. Now, now... if taste is subjective then calling her music bad/shit/mediocre is relevant only to you.

>>70660956
>It's not like we're discussing Brian Eno's art rock albums here.
>implying only art rock made by Eno could be beautiful
We're discussing the Grimes' art pop here, one of the defining artists of the 2010s decade. Beauty has many shapes and styles.

>>70660865
>I dont understand what the point you're trying to make is
You're trying too hard to sound convincing about not liking her music. If you truly didn't like it, you'd stop writing whole paragraphs about how much it didn't effect you and instead write whole paragraphs about music that DOES.

>>70661172
This. Someone who truly dislikes something wouldn't invest so much effort in vain. I think that anon is frustrated that he couldn't get into her music because he knows it's actually great.

>>70660895
>Due to the culture of rampant contrarianism on this board, the only time you are going to see a huge majority here saying that they "like" something is when the thing in question isn't good enough to be worth hating. Likewise, the only time you are going to see a huge majority here saying that they "hate" something is when the thing in question IS good enough to be worth hating (Because - to paraphrase James Brooks - people throw rocks at things that shine because things that shine are easier to see.)
>For an artist, being universally loved on /mu is a bad sign. Likewise being universally hated on /mu is a bad sign. However being simultaneously strongly loved AND strongly hated by /mu is a wonderful sign, since the size of that dichotomy itself is the closest thing this place has to offer to a true judgment of artistic value.
>The proof that Grimes IS a great artist (insofar as /mu hive-mind opinion is concerned) lies in the fact that she has the POWER TO DIVIDE this place. Only the greatest artists can do that.

>>70661172
Who are you to decide what I would and wouldn't be posting about under certain criteria? I've listened to grimes' music, I find her fanbase on this board obnoxious and making a huge fuss over an unspecactular artist, and here we are.

>>70661157
It may sound cute and catchy to you and that's exactly what her music is made for. To be catchy, cure and easily sold. Be real and don't treat it as anything more than that. And it's not like she's revolutionized music in any way. On the contrary, Brian Eno has. Multiple times and in multiple ways.

File: Daenerys.jpg (23KB, 536x536px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 536x536px

>>70660413
>>70660581
>falls for obvious bait post

>>70661543
>Be real and don't treat it as anything more than that.
Be real and don't dismiss her music as shallow when it's obviously much more than that. It's obvious that her music affected people so there's clearly an emotional content at the core of her work. It's not just some catchy stuff to fill the air with sounds. Also her music is 100% made by her, so it's super authentic (how many well known female artists could claim that? Not even Bjork could say that.)

>And it's not like she's revolutionized music in any way.
Wait a minute, do you expect a newish artist to revolutionize music after such a short period of time? That takes time. Even Eno took some decades to do that (e.g. his Ambient work didn't break the charts.) These things are judged retroactively, not right now.

But don't worry, she's on the right path. She's one of the first artists that made music after having access to a huge quantity of music thanks to the internet. Most older artists weren't exposed to so much diverse music as her. That's why her music is so eclectic and has influences from tons of genres. Another thing to consider is that she's a huge model for other women to start singing, writing AND producing. To take control over their careers, to be a one woman band.

When The Avalanches and Joanna Newsom are praising you, you know you're doing something right:
>As you grow older, you enter your thirties, you have to fight to keep that spirit alive. It’s easy to slip into routine and lose that spark. That’s part of the music making process, and the role new music plays, being inspired by hearing a new artist and how they go about something. Even if it’s completely stylistically different – the way Grimes just owns her shit, does it all herself with this DIY thing going on. You need that inspiration every day when you sit down to work, to wake you up and shake you up and break you out of your routine.

File: 1475776991535.gif (3MB, 480x620px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 480x620px

>>70661649
>falling for the metabait
>when posting with trashies, who are notorious for being metabaiters

File: 15178136_1207806372607877_146966930512636673_n.jpg (56KB, 605x453px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 605x453px

>>70661981
>metabait

>>70661941
>Also her music is 100% made by her, so it's super authentic (how many well known female artists could claim that? Not even Bjork could say that.)
Literally Taylor Swift can say that. And she doesn't deserve a pat on the back for meeting expectations. And honestly based on her utterly pedestrian songwriting she probably would probably be better served deferring to people who actually know what they're doing.
>These things are judged retroactively, not right now
And here you are activley claming to know otherwise. You're literally undermining your own argument. And don't give me the "I just said she's on the right track" shit because you're saying the exact same thing just in different wrapping.
>When The Avalanches and Joanna Newsom are praising you
Newsom is alright but so are a lot of artists. And The Avalanches are overrated derivative trash.

>>70662127
Do you have the complete picture?

>>70661981
this is some next level pretending to be retarded shit

>>70661474
>Who are you to decide what I would and wouldn't be posting about under certain criteria?
A psychology researcher with a working brain.

>I find her fanbase on this board obnoxious
Uh... so you're actually just someone with a chip on your shoulder. Explains a lot.

>>70662171
>Literally Taylor Swift can say that
You what? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_%28Taylor_Swift_album%29#Personnel

>And honestly based on her utterly pedestrian songwriting she probably would probably be better served deferring to people who actually know what they're doing.
That's just your subjective opinion. Irrelevant.

>And here you are activley claming to know otherwise. You're literally undermining your own argument. And don't give me the "I just said she's on the right track" shit because you're saying the exact same thing just in different wrapping.
Where I undermined my argument? Explain exactly what do you mean.

>Newsom is alright but so are a lot of artists. And The Avalanches are overrated derivative trash.
Again, that's just your opinion. Honestly, I'm not impressed by your posts. So far you said only bullshit. When are you going to deliver the real arguments?

>>70662227
dunno why but this really got me, losing my shit atm

>>70662171
>Literally Taylor Swift can say that.
Different anon speaking. Nope - she can't. Because it's not true.

>>70661474
>I find her fanbase on this board obnoxious
Because they're tough and you can't beat them with arguments? It's understandable why do you hate them. They called yourself on your own bullshit so many times it's unbelievable...

>>70662282
>A psychology researcher with a working brain.
good to see that you're squandering it by analyzing 4chan posting. Real glad we have top of the line scholars like yourself at the forefront of psychological research. And while were on the topic of making shit up did you know I have 4 PhDs?
>>70662357
>That's just your subjective opinion. Irrelevant.
Oh sorry I didnt know something being subjective meant it wasnt of any value. So yknow, since everything is effectivley subjective we should probably just like, what, kill ourselves? Sounds good, better than talking to you 2bh.
>Where I undermined my argument? Explain exactly what do you mean
>spoonfeed me
I dont have the patience for this
>Honestly, I'm not impressed by your posts. So far you said only bullshit
S A M E

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

File: IMG_2252.png (15KB, 528x434px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 528x434px

>>70662438
>They called yourself on your own bullshit so many times it's unbelievable
They really havent. There isnt really even any "bullshit" to be calling out, other than that thing I said about taylor swift, I just kind of remember being told once that she writes all her own songs and was regurgitating it, but it seems likely that it isnt actually true. So yeah my bad there.

Other than that? Im just talking about how I feel. You can't really "refute" it.

>>70662497
>good to see that you're squandering it by analyzing 4chan posting.
I specialize in psychology research regarding networked computer use and social networking. There's nothing 'squandered' about it.

>>70660956
>It's not like we're discussing Brian Eno's art rock albums here.
Speaking of which:
>Grimes’ performance was incredible. Someone recently told me she’s the most important electronic artist since Brian Eno and, after this, I have to agree.
http://www.nylon.com/articles/the-meadows-2016-review

File: image.jpg (95KB, 660x660px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 660x660px

>>70660452
I remember when /grimes/ general was started about a year ago.

I made the original /wpop/ general picture with her on it and it became a big deal about how grimes needs her own general and how she shouldn't be in /wpop/. I took a long break from /mu/, but I was amused grimesposting seems to be growing strong still, although it seems /wpop/ died.

Did I miss much in 2016? 2015, early 2016 seemed better and more active than now...

>>70662673
no

animejames found out about this place and will have melt downs in this thread occasionally

we found out where james posts from time to time

that's about all the shit that happened post-medieval warfare

>>70662673
>2015, early 2016 seemed better and more active than now...
There's one slight problem: Grimes just released new music in late 2015, so of course there was a huge interest. Her threads are now less active because she didn't release a new album since AA. The things will change once she will bless us with a new album...

>I made the original /wpop/ general picture with her on it and it became a big deal about how grimes needs her own general and how she shouldn't be in /wpop/. I took a long break from /mu/, but I was amused grimesposting seems to be growing strong still, although it seems /wpop/ died.
As you could see, /wpop/ was a flash in the pan, Grimes is still going strong.

>Did I miss much in 2016?
There was a lot of drama, a lot of shitposting, trolling, interesting discussions, lots of rare pics and some bootlegs shared, all that stuff.

>>70662601
>taking everything so seriously

probably tylo b chillin

>>70665432
thankyou

>white apologist indieshit
what a bore

>>70665666
(You)

File: fuyfjhvjlh.jpg (709KB, 936x1278px) Image search: [Google]

709KB, 936x1278px

>>70658058
>Grimes

Does /mu/ ever talk about Jay Reatard?

>>70666213
This thread is getting deleted. Good riddance!