/script>
Is he the new Anthony Fantano of /mu/?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FhhB9teHqU
>>73404856
>31:50
nope.
>>73404856
i wish
/mu/ isn't smart enough to parrot this guy's opinions, they just link the video
ewww he needs a better mic setup or something nigga sounds like he's stirring mac n cheese
No, because Samuel actually analyzes the music and speaks of its composition and arrangements.
Fantano is only capable of using decriptive terms like "RATTLING HI-HATS".
>>73404885
millenials everyone
>>73404856
Apart from tmr, the music he covers is not the stuff that /mu/ listens to. He usually does classical music. The Trout Mask video was special.
>>73404856
He mostly talks about classical music and modern stuff, so no, he isn't.
The video is great though
>>73404972
Adjective stacking is not competent reviewing.
>>73404856
This video really creates more questions than it answers. How did Captain Beefheart know that all these things would work together? Did he even have any idea what he was doing when he wrote this? Is the song actually complex or does the analysis just make it seem more complicated than it actually is, and the song is actually just a bunch of unrelated musical ideas mashed together?
>>73405008
Yes it is. It's supposed to give you a descriptive measure of what the music sounds like. Painting a picture of the whole. Whereas Samuel is breaking things down to mechanics of how music works.
Both are worthwhile methods of analyzing music.
>>73405056
He does a follow up video where he interviews the drummer. It's pretty interesting. Also, if you can read music, you know damn well that shit isn't easy to play.
>>73404979
He also did a Tom Waits song. He's not entirely doing classical music.
>>73405089
Well I'm not questioning the technicality of it, but just because something is hard to play doesn't necessarily mean it's complex in every musical aspect.
No, he's actually knowledgeable about music
>>73404856
i can hear his disgusting lip smacking
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zv-I-CNv3JI
this video is amazing
>>73405170
The notes he uses certainly aren't out of the ordinary. The idea of playing different time signatures at the same time is very out there, especially for popular music. The same goes for several unique playing styles the band used on the album, such as the cardboard in the drums and strumming chords on the bass. Also, seven different "sections" in a song under 2 minutes is pretty crazy.
>>73404856
There is only ONE Anthony Fantano.
>>73404972
On the other hand, describing music at the molecular level is sort of an empty practice itself.
It's sort of like how psychology is useful even though it's not exactly based in science, because you can maybe explain what's happening from a scientific perspective, like "Well, you're feeling elated because there was a rush of endorphins in your brain." But that doesn't help you in an everyday sense, so it's also a good idea to focus on the abstract reasoning behind things.
>>73405253
Yeah you're right. Different time signatures, keys, and even tempos all at the same time. How do you even come up with that stuff?
>>73404856
he's alright but I prefer deep_cuts, as he uses
an array of colourful adjectives/language to assist in conveying the "feel" of the music, but also understands music theory enough to break it down to its basic components.
Not only that, but he steers from reviews and arbitrary scoring metrics and sticks to just recommending good shit. There's /mu/ core, obviously, but he also tosses out the occasional surprise which makes it appealing to plebs and patricians.
Here's his latest work, maybe you'll find something that appeals to you:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRYhCg0DHloE9gn-PAiAYNg/videos
this guy annoys me. why is he wearing a suit? also how many times is he gonna use "rather ______ manner" when talking about this record? he spends like five minutes talking about something that should only take maybe one or two minutes.
>>73404856
hairline way too good to compare him to fantano