I know it's not cool anymore, but what are some of the

>>71738768
production is better but honestly all of these suffer from horrible vocals

and honestly only trst got the synthpop revival correctly. far superior to everyone atm

>>71738856
>production is better but honestly all of these suffer from horrible vocals
I disagree :(

And I do like that album, but I was looking for more uplifting stuff. The sort of thing you could play around normies without them going into attack mode

>>71739334
everybody is a normie so idk what you mean.
just play ed sheeran if you just want everybody to like you or swedish house mafia. no big deal in listening to stuff you dislike for 30minutes to please your friends.

>>71739742
I have no idea what you're saying

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqJQEf9q6go

>>71738768
They're all great songs.

>>71738856
>all of these suffer from horrible vocals
Bullshit. TRST have horrible vocals. That prevented them to have success. Plus the terrible album covers. Shame about the instrumentals.

>>71741585
all of them have clean vocals which is what i hate combined with synthpop. think thats better suited for trip-hop

could careless about public success. what matters how it sounds 2 me

>>71738856

>Lauren
>Claire

They have angelic voices

>>71741645
I'm a big Grimes fan and I wouldn't say her voice is actually that good. It's the way she produces her vocals that make it sound so great, her live vocals are pretty weak (although that could also be because of the way she performs, it's hard to tell how good a singer she actually is cuz she's all over the place on stage)

>>71741623
>all of them have clean vocals which is what i hate combined with synthpop.
So, it's just a personal preference. IMO clean vocals work best with synthpop. See all the relevant synthpop artists as a proof.

>>71741747
yeah forgot to add IMO
but nah i hate clean vocals. pet shop boys n depeche mode. always sounded rough 2 me which is why i like it.
again could careless about relevancy just about how i enjoy it.
i do like what grimes does with her vocals sometimes(mainly visions) due 2 her excellent production skills. but on AA its 2 clean for me. unless she went with the demo version of realitii

>>71741707
You're not that big Grimes fan if you say that about her vocals. Her voice is an acquired taste but it's undeniably good, emotive and versatile. As for her live vocals, you forgot that she moves a lot on stage. Try doing that and see how hard it is to sing.

>>71741789
>As for her live vocals, you forgot that she moves a lot on stage.
I literally said it in my post...

>>71738768
>synthpop revival era
Shaking The Habitual was the last interesting thing to come out of this imo

>>71741783
>pet shop boys n depeche mode. always sounded rough 2 me which is why i like it.
They sound clean, what are you talking about? You could understand every word they're singing and they rarely go overboard with vocal gymnastics. If you want rough vocals, try some Gary Numan.

>>71741830
this is what you consider clean?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5OYtAauQRk
sounds rough 2 me.

>>71741816
Shaking The Habitual is anything but synthpop.

>>71741857
It sounds clean. It no wonder it was a hit.

>>71741909
What would that "anything" be other than synthpop?

too much arguing about nothing, not enough posting bangerz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI79GPXAICM

>>71741992
nigga this isn't synthpop

John Maus

synthbump

>>71740904
he's a massive sperg

>>71739742
>no big deal in listening to stuff you dislike for 30minutes to please your friends

Total bollocks, you don't understand suffering at all. If I ever have to pretend to enjoy Mr Brightside again I'm going to blow up a hospital

>>71738768
This: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7kx9ms9ZYA

Golden fucking catchy tune.

>>71745501
i work a retail job. if i can do it for 8 hours
op can handle it for 30mins

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2gdbQpESNY

kek, i remember when people on /mu/ liked shit passion pit and purity ring

dark times indeed

I found this song a few days ago. Surprised I had never heard it. The beat sounds a bit like M83's Midnight City, which I love.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gWXe6Am73E&index=28&list=PL0QlR4a9I-aO2pCoaPxZ2nIaEl_ysC33K

>>71738768
>I know it's not cool anymore
It's not? That sucks, I was just getting into it. What is cool right now?

File: bible of coolism cover art complete.jpg (265KB, 746x818px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 746x818px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4e2hBQ-qUE

>>71747393
memerap, although thankfully it is due a death at the end of the decade

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEamE0MYPkg

obvs

>>71748340
Superb song 'n' video

>>71738856
I agree with you, a lot of these "synth-pop" revival groups just straight up suck and Trust is amazing. Though I disagree with you on Grimes, I really did enjoy Realiti and Art Angels

https://youtu.be/lzGGAs50Wcc
this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgpgkI3eMxM

i always feel like the little 90s dance samples bit before the chorus should come back more

but then maybe i wouldn't love it as much