How lo-fi does something have to be for it to be unlistenable for you? I've listened to a lot of lo-fi music and rarely have I come across anything with absolutely unforgivably bad sound quality.
One of my favorite albums is Bee Thousand by Guided By Voices which is notorious for it being a very lo-fi album
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ6yS71j-cw
To me this recording is right in the sweet spot of listenable lo-fi. To the point where the audio quality legitimately adds to the overall sound of the song without ruining the listening experience.
Also, what are some bands that bother you when people describe them as lo-fi? For me it's always been the Microphones. I mean, all those records were done in a studio with a sound board, professional mics etc I understand that the equipment used at that time was outdated but the resulting product is a very well recorded, mixed, and mastered set of albums.
>>72767009
>How lo-fi does something have to be for it to be unlistenable for you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmXXuTBcrbo
>>72767009
That is too lo-fi for me. This is probably as lo-fi as I will go https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTz9SVlqrmM
>>72767089
sounds good to me bro what are you talking about
>>72767094
Yeah that album is definitely pretty dirty sounding
>>72767009
The Microphones can get pretty lo fi at times
https://youtu.be/xeFWFU-D7Ng?t=1h5m20s
>inb4 itaots
not lo-fi
>>72767137
But what does lo-fi mean to you? Sounding weird? I don't understand some people's parameters for what lo-fi is. As far as I'm concerned Song Islands is no different than the other Microphones albums, most of those singles were recorded at Dub Narcotic, a professional studio (although basically just a warehouse) with professional, but outdated equipment.
To me, lo-fi is any music that is recorded with out dated consumer grade equipment that involves such imperfections as tape hiss and distortion/warping.
>>72767156
Yeah that album was recorded really well.
>thinking distortion = lo-fi
>>72767181
the track specifically Iinked is a demo quality song with only phil and guitar with some pretty awful tape flanging going on
>>72767199
You linked the whole album
>>72767205
the timestamp was on "phil elverum's will" or at least it should have been
>>72767223
Oh well, then yeah that's an exception it's a demo. What bothers me is like when people say The Glow Pt. 2 is lo-fi.