What heaping scoop of garbage this is.

And no, this isn't a bait thread, I'm serious about this.

Can't wait to see a thread in 6 months saying how this album clicked for you

File: 9884528296b7e87cbeb1c0a8129aa015cd1da57b9e8d2e1f5d494ce746d68d9c.png (127KB, 520x484px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 520x484px

>>70721299

>>70721338
>this isn't a bait thread
yes it is

>>70721359
>>70721359
>>70721359
OP READ THIS

this album grows and grows - it will only improve on every listen
when you start to notice more and more individual layers of noise - and how intricately they come in and out of focus
it only gets better

Yeah it's pretty trash. Repetitive, simple as fuck songwriting with watered down electronic music style production that everyone praises as genius.

>>70721396
I geniunly think this album is nothing but mere boredom, even though it may or may not have great influence on shoegaze. How anyone around these parts gives it some cult status or lists it as a 10/10 is far beyond my comprehension. I really wanted to like it, because I do enjoy a lot of out of the norm music, but this didn't spark my interest at all.

File: 132893278134.png (243KB, 600x652px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 600x652px

>Only Shallow

>>70721626
congratulations, you dislike an acclaimed album. you're so special.

>>70721689
Are you fucking retarded? I didn't come here to brag about how I'm unique for not liking it, I came here for someone to explain me the fucking appeal of such highly acclaimed album.

>>70721522
Yeah, I've yet to really appreciate it. I really enjoy the way it sounds, the atmosphere, the """""""aesthetic""""""" etc. but the songwriting seems kind of trite to me. What am I missing?

first song should click instantly desu

>>70721723
you literally just said "this album is garbage"
this is one of the most acclaimed albums of all time, finding an explanation as to why people like it is incredibly easy
unless you're a lazy retard who can't use google and expects everyone to spoon-feed you

>>70721804
So? Does that mean it's good, because many critics find it of such worth? Can't you base your own opinion without validating it through others?

>>70721833
oh I see now. this is bait

>>70721850
Is everything outside your circlejerk a bait?

>>70721870
you're not special for disliking this album

>>70721892
This whole board prides itself on being contrarian, so that statement is quite unusual since it's loaded with them.

>>70721751
Not much, you got it right on point. Outside it's unique sound that it has for using more electronic styles of studio production onto rock music, the actual composition is nothing special.

>>70721522
>simple as fuck songwriting
its pop music, but it's really well crafted pop music - it's been played without noise and still sounds good
>>70721751
listen to how the noise interacts with the structure of the song - how noise comes into focus, builds up, is layered and stripped away - it's not an aesthetic layer put on top - it's heavily interwoven into the song writing
>>70721833
no, but it's unbelievably egotistical to believe your opinion has more weight than the majority of modern rock criticism. I'm not telling you to listen to pitchfork instead of yourself- but almost every modern critic, including hipster ones like scaruffi and christgau praise it
maybe, maybe they're right

>>70721993
Thanks, I'll give it another listen.

>>70721993
That may be true and I am aware of the fact that it's quite possible that I'm in the wrong here, but I probably don't like it as much since shoegaze does nothing for me in general. I'll give it another try in a month or two.

Also, does weed help while listening to this one?

ITT: underages who haven't grown out of shitty shoegaze
i bet you still listen to nu-metal...

>>70722042
loveless is far better than the rest of shoegaze, it's completely on a league of its own
forget smoking - my only advice is keep listening
listen before sleep
try and see the layers of noise - seperate them in your head
theres so many overdubs its impossible to notice them all -even after 10 or 20 listens

>>70722092
Will do, thanks.

>>70721993
>its pop music, but it's really well crafted pop music - it's been played without noise and still sounds good
What makes it well crafted? The melodies are practically radio pop tier, nothing sophisticated.

>no, but it's unbelievably egotistical to believe your opinion has more weight than the majority of modern rock criticism. I'm not telling you to listen to pitchfork instead of yourself- but almost every modern critic, including hipster ones like scaruffi and christgau praise it
maybe, maybe they're right
His opinion definitely has more weight to him than anyone else's, are you fucking retarded?

>>70722130
>His opinion definitely has more weight to him than anyone else's, are you fucking retarded?
only to himself - but thinking like that all the time is arrogant and negative.
other peoples opinions can have far more value if they're more educated in the subject. scaruffi is more educated in rock music than me, for example. if scaruffi (and almost all other rock criticism in recent years) says loveless is good, me not liking it the first time i try is irrelevant to me.

So /mu. How many times did you listen to this album before it clicked?

3 times for me desu

>>70721804
It's one of the most acclaimed albums of this board. People outside of indie circles don't give a fuck about this record.

>>70722382
first time. i dont really understand the people who say it takes a shit ton of listens

>>70722519
>People outside of indie circles don't give a fuck about this record.
Most people outside of indie circles don't give a fuck about music in general.

>>70722382
Prob 3 as well. Thought it was just hipster noise bullshit. Came back months later with a more open mind, and now I feel it's basically just pop with a shitload of cool effects. Cool album

File: 28145672063_e0276a702a_o.jpg (144KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 800x1200px

>>70721299
I understand your point. I personally did not start off with shoegaze from this particular album, but reached it via smaller dream pop and japanese rock/shoegaze bands.

Like many have said, this is a 'grower not a shower'. It is pinnacle shoegaze and therefore noisy, dreamy and some people might argue lazy and boring. You might need multiple listens and possible some psychs to full appreciate it.
Some of these contentions come down to simple genre preference.

If you don't/are not ready to put up with wall of sound of the shugazi genres, it will probably never grow on you.

But this album is somewhat special in that it embodies most (not all) what shoegaze is.
>take a slow song and distort it with walls and layers of sound.

Lyrically it is, as i just recently appreciated, also fairly nice.
Give this a try:
https://youtu.be/oSm_5TQiccM
It is a clear version of the song 'when you sleep'. Listen to the cover and then listen to the original - if this contrast using the same song does not envoke feelings in you, it probably is not for you.

>>70722585
moronic follower types will force themselves to like something if its popular enough in their community. i personally like this album and shoegaze in general, but if you dont like something on your first listen, maybe its just not for you, and thats ok.

>>70723437
i listened to it after watching falling in love "sometimes" in lost in translation. this was before i even discovered /mu/ and pitchfork retard

File: 16251723_10155017828678094_6243997164420627120_o.jpg (207KB, 2048x1235px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 2048x1235px

I think to really *get* this album, you need have to have experienced some serious depressive moods. This album near-perfectly replicates the variety of emotional experience you might have while going in and out of a shitty-ass state.

After a few measly snares, you're plunged into some chaotic, distorted mess. It gets darker, slower, sadder, then hits you with what sounds like a human, wailing and crying. it phases out of that into an even slower, agonizing track. A female voice which would otherwise sound nice and soothing, become ghostly and painful.

An upbeat track suddenly comes along filled with hope that is quite immediately taken away, pushing you back to the lower and sadder tones. The upswing still continues though, with a back and forth between a feminine-sounding higher pitched synth, and the more masculine, lower, distorted chords, leaving you with some minor catharsis. But the journey isn't over yet, and another low track using that same snare fill tries to return you to the beginning.

Suddenly, the chaos and distortion all but stops, and you hit the lowest point of the album. It's a soft and reflective piece that seems to deal with the source of chaos and confusion. Having dealt with that, you're shifted into track that comes with no depressing tones, and is filled with nothing but hope for the future.

It may have been too soon to hope, though, because you're hit with the final reprisal of the album trying to drag you back into itself with angry, distorted chords. Pushing past that, the distortion finally clears away, phasing in and out just a little bit, leaving you with a final catharsis, although you still get the sense that these feelings could return once again.


It's amazing what a man with two guitars and a few vacuum cleaners can accomplish.

File: a0938422481_10.jpg (129KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 1200x1200px

>>70723370
Addition: although i do enjoy this album in parts, i do not consider MY pinnacle of shoegaze. There are songs on this album i don't enjoy at all or only enjoy when on drugs.
I more prefer japanese interpretations of the genre.

>pic related

>>70723437
Is it really possible to appreciate everything that's contained in an album all at once?

Maybe you are "liking" it for the wrong reason

>>70722519
You have no fucking idea what you're talking about

Why do we humor threads like this? Literally every day somebody posts Loveless or Spiderland or Laughing Stock or some vaguely challenging /mu/core album and asks what they're missing and every answer is "listen to it more". It's just fucking laziness and unwillingness to be challenged and take a half-step out of the comfort zone for forty minutes

>>70723437
i think you replied to the wrong person

>>70723370
Loveless is my favourite album, but I really dislike When You Sleep. I can only tolerate it if I pretend I'm watching an episode of The Adventures of Pete and Pete in my head when it comes on.

To Here Knows When, Loomer, and Sometimes represent Loveless best imo.

>>70723556
Or it's just trolling

>>70723490
thanks for the laugh

>>70721723
>I didn't come here to brag about how I'm unique for not liking it
Yes you did you fucking faggot

>>70723599
I liked his post, actually

>>70723580
Different strokes for different folks, eh.
Just give the link a try and tell me what you think. Would be highly appreciated

>>70723582
But we regularly have the "itt: albums you want to get into but can't" or whatever threads
It's this stupid prevailing idea on this board that if you don't enjoy an album then you're not listening to it right or something. Just listen to it like you fucking would anything else and if you still don't enjoy it maybe you just don't enjoy it.

>>70723704
Eh, that live arrangement is bugging me a bit. Probably due to the vocal timing being changed up slightly. I learnt the song on the piano a few months back too, so I'm probably experiencing conflicting vibes.

>>70722210
>only to himself - but thinking like that all the time is arrogant and negative.
But he isn't though. Shit he made this topic AND has listened to the record before more than once.

>scaruffi is more educated in rock music than me
Awful example, many things he says can be disproven with a quick google search.

>>70723726
No, it's just people trolling.

Calm down