Between these 3, who is better and why?

Same fucking thread, every single day

File: 1486268484385.jpg (67KB, 630x828px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 630x828px

Hope Sandoval

File: ca34acc40edcbed9736d645098ec7515.jpg (76KB, 600x901px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 600x901px

>>74856137

>>74856127
Björk > Kate Bush >>>>>> Grimes

>>74856137
t h i c c

>>74856127
all of them stinks fishy and dirty feet (yay, im gay) but Grimes makes the best music

>>74856199
It's different. The last one was about "Are these 3 the best female artists and producers ever?". Same pic =/= same thread.

>>74856127

music:
Bjork > Kate >>>>>>>>>>>> Grimes

appearance:
Bjork > Kate >>>>>>>>>>>> Grimes

>music
grimes > bjork > k bush
>appearance
grimes >>> bjork > k bush

>>74856503
>>74856227
I don't understand why you idiots must add so many ">" signs. That's a clear proof you are triggered by her music and never gave it a fair chance. Hopefully you'll realize how stupid was your Grimeshate.

>>74856662
>That's a clear proof you are triggered by her music and never gave it a fair chance
What, I listen to Grimes since "Vanessa" came out, your post is a clear proof you are just adoring Grimes without thinking about the impact her records have. Which is very little comparing to Kate and Björk.

>>74857505
Dude, do you judge impact or the actual quality of their artistry? The question was about who is better not who had more impact. Also the impact is mostly determined by marketing. Grimes doesn't have the big budgets of Bjork and Kate Bush to have a huge impact.

File: borkbork.jpg (38KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 300x225px

i said it before and I'll say it again, bork is the best. nobody will ever be able to top her, and that's final

>>74857797
Grimes already surpassed her. Grimes songs and production > Bjork songs and production.

File: Can you believe this nigger.jpg (112KB, 299x341px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 299x341px

>>74857785
>actual quality of their artistry
Which is what makes Björk and Kate better. And marketing is definitely not a factor, do you think Björk sells millions like a simple pop singer?

>>74857844
>mfw delusional grimesfags actually believe this
I've said it before, y'all make it harder to actually like the girl

Björk > Kate > that goblin

>>74857844
lmao

>>74856127
Aren't they all basically the same?

>>74856127

Bjork

>>74858689

No, Grimes wishes she was good as Kate and Bjork.

File: IMG_5732.jpg (57KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 640x640px

>>74856532
Yeah sure ok

>>74858871
mommy

Bjork > Kate > Literally Who

>>74856137
i really wish people would stop posting thos greased pig

>>74858908
Kate pretty much gave me a mommy kink desu

>>74856212
someone with taste on /mu/? what's happening?

>>74856127
Bjork is always the best, stop making these threads.

>>74857844
nice bait

File: YAS.gif (4MB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 300x200px

>>74856127
You know the answer!

>>74856127
i love only claire

>>74858100
>do you think Björk sells millions like a simple pop singer?
She sold millions of albums and singles like any simple popstar.
>I've said it before, y'all make it harder to actually like the girl
So what? If you're triggered so much by mere opinions that's your fault. Everyone is entitled to their opinions.

>>74858718
>No, Grimes wishes she was good as Kate and Bjork.
But she's already better than them. Better at singing, better at production, better at aesthetic, better at songwriting. Unlike them, she could do everything by herself.

>>74863290

Nah, Grimes has gone downhill since Visions. Her first two albums are great though I'll give you that.

I know it's all opinion really but doing something all by yourself doesn't automatically make you better, it's not a crime to have someone in the studio with you. I don't know about Kate, but Bjork has done nearly everything by herself since Post anyway.

>>74863413
>nearly
lol

>>74863504

She's not a one woman orchestra.

>>74863504

It’s okay to collaborate, most artists do it, Grimes could learn a thing or two.

I held in vomit from drinking i don't think I've ever held in vomit before

>>74862415
cringe

>>74863413
>Nah, Grimes has gone downhill since Visions.
Do you realize that you're completely wrong? Art Angels was a success comparable to Bjork's Post. I'm afraid you just don't get it.

>>74863602
Guess what else most artists are? NOT extremely talented. Only the really good ones are capable of pulling things off entirely on their own.
See also: Bach, Beethoven, Berlioz, Schubert, etc. Virtually all composers whose music left a lasting legacy on the course of music history worked alone. Today is no different. The real reason why most contemporary pop music is so terrible is because most of it is written by committee.

>>74863602
Grimes is talented enough to create masterpieces on her own. In her case, collaborating with other people would dilute her art. She puts emphasis on being 100% her music. There are exceptions though: she collaborated with a few artists she likes (BloodPop, Hana, Aristophanes, Janelle Monae, Bleachers, Majical Cloudz).

File: 5669454541_1ca4bdc7a9_b.jpg (118KB, 975x650px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 975x650px

Stop the fucking waifu-fagging

This is the only true and pure answer

>>74864433
>Stop the fucking waifu-fagging
>posts his literal who waifu

>>74864473
no. grouper (no offence to her) doesnt really have waifu-fags on here. She just makes really great music. People only like grimes cuz they think shes cute

>>74856127
Grimes>Kate Bush>>>>>>>Dog Shit>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Grimes

>>74864715
>She just makes really great music.
Her music is a snoozefest.
>People only like grimes cuz they think shes cute
This is just what you want to believe. You're wrong. Her look has nothing to do with the actual music. People are listening to sounds, not images.

>>74864768
WTF is this shit?

>>74864136

An opinion on music can't be wrong but okay. Art Angels IS a good album, but it's nowhere near as good as her others. And I don't think she's as good as Bjork or Kate yet, she needs that one breakthrough album for me, like Homogenic is the one that really made me into Bjork.

You mean a success music wise right? Because if not

Bjork was everywhere when Post came out, on TV, chat shows etc. It's Oh So Quiet (as much as I think it's overplayed) still gets played on multiple adverts on mainstream TV (in the UK at least)

I don't think it's really fair to compare sales because obviously people hardly buy CDs anymore. But in no way is it comparable to Post, Grimes' youtube vids have millions of views but that's it.

>Art Angels debuted at number one on Billboard's Top Alternative Albums chart with first-week sales of 11,000 copies, earning Boucher her first number one on the chart.[19] As of February 2016, the album had sold 50,000 copies in the United States.[20] The album also peaked at numbers two and 36 on the Independent Albums and Billboard 200 charts, respectively.[21][22] The album debuted at number 31 on the UK Albums Chart, selling 2,964 copies in its first week.[23] Upon the album's release on CD five weeks later, it re-entered the UK chart at number 59 with 4,193 copies sold.

There isn't an exact figure but Post has sold millions, even debut sold 5 million and she wasn't as famous then.

>>74864368

I somehow forgot about those, I don't mind if Grimes never collaborates again. I just hope her next album is better than AA. Her song for suicide squad was not promising, hope that was a one-off.

>>74864140

I know that. Bjork writes all her own music apart from a few songs where she collabs with others though. I don't really want to undermine them but her producers don't do that much, most of the time she's alone in the studio.

>>74864864
>People only like grimes cuz they think shes cute
then explain the recent Clairo attention

>>74864929
>but it's nowhere near as good as her others.
AA is just different. Comparing it with her past work is like comparing apples and oranges. Both are good on their own. Being poppier =/= being worse.
>You mean a success music wise right? Because if not
Compare
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_(Bj%C3%B6rk_album)#Critical_reception
to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Angels#Critical_reception
IMO AA was better received by critics.
>Bjork was everywhere when Post came out, on TV, chat shows etc. It's Oh So Quiet (as much as I think it's overplayed) still gets played on multiple adverts on mainstream TV (in the UK at least)
That's true because her label had a nice budget to spend.
>But in no way is it comparable to Post, Grimes' youtube vids have millions of views but that's it.
It's funny that Grimes YT views surpass by far Bjork's views. Bjork's fanbase is aging and they're not really using Internet.
>There isn't an exact figure but Post has sold millions, even debut sold 5 million and she wasn't as famous then.
Bjork was a mid tier mainstream artist in the '90s, at least in the UK. But those sales are now reserved to the big mainstream artists because of piracy, streaming, etc. Grimes is an under the radar indie artist. She's pretty known but hardly popular.

>>74864966
That Clairo is just a pretty face with no music talent. Don't confuse her career with Grimes' career. Grimes actually managed to make mesmerizing and innovative electronic music, not the same rehashed indie rock.

>>74865096

>That's true because her label had a nice budget to spend.

Bjork's on an indie label and they don't have that much money. She was just in demand.

>AA is just different. Comparing it with her past work is like comparing apples and oranges. Both are good on their own. Being poppier =/= being worse.

Nothing wrong with pop, I love it, I said I think AA is good. It's only natural to compare artists stuff to their previous work.

>It's funny that Grimes YT views surpass by far Bjork's views. Bjork's fanbase is aging and they're not really using Internet.

Wrong, there used to be a channel that was up for years which had many millions of more views than her official channel because they were in better quality but it was taken down recently.

>Bjork was a mid tier mainstream artist in the '90s, at least in the UK. But those sales are now reserved to the big mainstream artists because of piracy, streaming, etc. Grimes is an under the radar indie artist. She's pretty known but hardly popular.

That's what I'm saying: Art Angels' success is not comparable to Post.

>>74865474
>Bjork's on an indie label and they don't have that much money. She was just in demand.
See her Wikipedia page. You'll see that she collaborated with many major labels.
>Nothing wrong with pop, I love it, I said I think AA is good. It's only natural to compare artists stuff to their previous work.
What is wrong with AA compared to her past work? Isn't the production better? Isn't the songwriting sharper? Isn't the singing better?
>That's what I'm saying: Art Angels' success is not comparable to Post.
The commercial success is not comparable. But the critical success it is comparable.

>>74866258

Those labels were for distribution purposes only, because her label is so small they can’t ship everything themselves.

I don’t know what it is, there’s good songs on there, Realiti is one of her best ever. I just enjoy listening to her older stuff more.