What do you feel are the most ambitious albums of the 2010's?

>>72966229
>reads Pitchfork once

>>72966229
Is this a bait thread?

>>72966235
>>72966240

thinks music is subjective.
these albums are highly rated because they have a lot of work put into them.

File: 3247530.jpg (17KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 300x300px

>>72966229
Most ambitious? I think you missed this one

>>72966261

forgot that greentext arrow

>>72966235
>hears guy shit post on /mu/ once

>>72966261
>highly rated = ambitious
damn

>>72966261

imagine having an opinion this shallow

>>72966287

yes... but it's "highly rated because ambitious" you fucking idiot

>>72966261
>thinks music is objective
so this is a bait thread, nice

>>72966287

well sort of... dude

i mean... not always... but that's usually how it goes

>>72966305
>the higher it rated the ambitious it is
fucking idiot

>>72966302
>>72966309
Haha Keked

>>72966331
no it's the more ambitious the more highly rated... you have no concept of causality

>>72966343
>the more ambitious the more highly rated
fucking idiot

>>72966365

>puts argument in greentext
"haha look guys i got em"
nice argument

>>72966229
Pic unrelated. All of these albums are crap btw.

>>72966229

I bet you were expecting people to actually post their favorite albums. It's okay we all make that mistake here sometimes

>>72966389
>I can tell nothing more
cool

>>72966401

"if i say that these albums (which are widely excepted as good) are bad, then i will look really cool and smart."

>>72966302

aesthetics might be subjective
but quality/complexity/production/compositional merit are all objective.

>>72966401
you can say you "don't like them"
but if you say they are not good then you are wrong

>>72966422
>If I keep sucking pitchfork's cock maybe mu-males will accept me

>>72966229
tfw the 2010s are really so bad that 2/3rds of those artists have made their masterpieces in prior decades

File: sb2h.jpg (913KB, 1800x1800px) Image search: [Google]

913KB, 1800x1800px

>>72966229
An ambitious album is an album that demonstrates an artist's determination to craft their work. If an album is recognizable as reflective of the hard work the artist put into to crafting the album, discernible in the intention of the artist, the album is ambitious.

I accept this argument but wish to suggest an another interesting conclusion. To be ambitious only means that an album demonstrates diligence and intention on behalf of the artist. The quality of the work itself does not quantify ambition, and notably bad albums may too demonstrate diligence on behalf of the artist. Would you consider an album that is poorly rated, or one that doesn't adhere to what is accepted as good, to be an ambitious album?