What's the best starting point /mu/ ?

Filth

>>75068226
The Seer

>>75068226
White Light

The Great Annihilator

>>75068301
>>75068328
these and Children of God

>I ALSO LISTEN TO SWANS THO. IM CULTURED THO

Cop

Children of God/World of Skin

How I Loved You

filth

then the seer

their new wave stuff is pretty bad t b h

their first fucking album

>>75068328
This

If you can't handle Soundtracks For The Blind, you're a pussy and you don't deserve music. But The Great Annihilator is where I'd start.

I started on filth, try something from every decade because all their albums are different.

Look on the wiki newfag

>if you want to kill your motherfucking self
>Soundtracks For The Blind

I've only listened to soundtrack for the blind anons, I liked it but not that much, what should I check out next?

>>75069047
Swans are honestly a band where it's best to listen to their most significant releases chronologically as they have a very palpable progression from release to release. I'd say listen to their no wave stuff first. If you don't like that maybe you'd prefer their new stuff instead.

File: Swans_2.jpg (918KB, 3754x3394px) Image search: [Google]

918KB, 3754x3394px

>>75069047
here you go

There's no definitive starting point, their discography is so varied that it comes down to preference really.

Some highlights
>industrial/ no wave
filth
>neo-folk/ goth-rock
White light from the mouth of infinity
>post-punk
The great annhiliator
>post-rock
To be kind (alternatively "my father.." it's way shorter)

>>75068226
The neckbeard store

>>75068440
kys

File: public castration.jpg (61KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 450x450px

Don't be a pussy

>>75069721
HOOOLY

>>75068226
There is never a good starting point. Just learn to enjoy music for what it is faggot.

>>75069721
Listening to Public Castration is a Good Idea is a good idea

>>75069721
>Play at maximum volume

File: M_Gira_Swans_Jennifer_Church_1399371782.jpg (45KB, 550x367px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 550x367px

>>75072005

I firmly believe that Soundtracks surpasses everything that came before it and should have been their last album. The new material is horrible.

>>75072702
It dosent sound like anything they've made before or after it.
Why don't you like the new albums?

>>75072798
>It dosent sound like anything they've made before or after it.
It doesn't sound much like anything anyone has ever done. I like 90's Swans but in my opinion this album is their best.
>Why don't you like the new albums?
To me they sound and feel jarring. As if they only had a couple of ideas and then stretched those to fill the running time.

>>75072872

I feel like it was intentionally repetitive for a hypnotic feel. Also, as many others here have pointed out, it's Swans doing a Glen Branca tribute, which I like as well. I might be wrong, but I loved their new material, especially The Seer

>>75072872
understandable. I'd argue that soundtracks has a lesser focus than their new albums, since it's trying out so many ideas, still does come together well.
the new records are just a little tighter to me.

>>75072964
Somehow I just feel like it didn't suit them. Maybe it just wasn't what I expected, because I have no problem with Burzum's Belus for example and that album is probably as repetitive as an album can be.

>>75072988
I'll give them that. When I first listened to Soundtracks, I thought it was a mess but little by little I started to get a feel for it. I think it helps a lot, if you actually listen to it as a soundtrack and not as a coherent album. It helps set expectations.