Is it true that no female artist is better than these 3?

>who is lady of rage

>>75169322
Yeah, all three have made me cum.

File: 5687798+_2bd03b02d68804505c15fcf8e7cfc613.jpg (13KB, 197x200px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 197x200px

>>75169322
>Implying women make music worth listening to

>>75169322
I'm ok with this

>>75169925
it looks like someone fap to pics of sex dolls.

>>75169971
Nice.

File: Lauren3603.jpg (405KB, 1932x1932px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 1932x1932px

>>75169977
>implying

File: unnamed.jpg (412KB, 1710x1751px) Image search: [Google]

412KB, 1710x1751px

>incoherently screeches into your thread

Lorde

>>75169322
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNuCNZK-r5A

This one is.

>>75170031
Eh I wish she would shut the fuck up because the rest sounsd good

>>75169322
Old School 50+ grandma - Blondie
Mom Tier - Bjork agreed
Sister Tier - Chelsea Wolfe
That quirky 32 year old Aunt you have - Joanna Newsom
The girl you want to fuck so bad but get her dry cleaning as a friend - Julia Holter

you think grimes herself makes these threads for attention

replace grimes with liz fraser and youve got a good argument

>>75170956
Hold on a sec: Liz Fraser has a beautiful voice and songwriting skills and that's all. Grimes has a beautiful voice (maybe the most similar to Liz - listen to Halfaxa) and super strong songwriting skills but also many other skills: producer, sound engineer, visual artist, dancer, director and editor. She also does everything by herself, unlike Liz. Grimes won.

File: 1490678978862.jpg (57KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x800px

>>75171179

>>75169322
>it's another "Grimes is the Kate Bush of our times" thread
Stop it. You're only making yourself look foolish.

Considering the girl from Grouper is the only good contemporary female musician, and considering you're all nerds who listen to this shit, the answer is ultimately: No.

>>75171507
>implying i even care

File: IMG_0308.jpg (85KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1000x1000px

>>75169322
lurk moar

File: lauryn-hill-2.jpg (249KB, 593x768px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 593x768px

Better than Grimes at least

> Top Tier
Kate Bush
Joanna Newsom
Bjork

> 2nd Tier
FKA Twigs
Grimes
The girl from Dead can Dance
Nina Simone

>3rd Tier
Joni Mitchell
Annie Clark
Angel Olsen


Any objects?

>>75171724
I forgot Erykah Badu in Top Tier

>>75171545
t. autism

>>75171571
Is this a joke?
>>75171724
Grimes is top tier, pal. You know it. Anyone with her wide range of skills and her innovative music deserves only the top tier.

>>75171859
Whitney was a mere singer and Lauryn Hill did only 1 fairly good album.

>>75171724
Add PJ Harvey on the top tier

File: large.png (469KB, 500x600px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 500x600px

Why is Fiona Apple so underrated on /mu/?

>>75172016
word

File: Delirious.jpg (158KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1024x1024px

Susanne Sundfor is better than all three of them.

>>75171836
>Grimes
>Innovative
Isn't she just Madonna-lite? What am I missing, Anon?

>>75172973
You're missing the fact that you're wrong. What Madonna song even sounds like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9UlQofrwzI ?

>>75172684
Those are stars

>>75172973
grimes is like madonna? in what possible way?

File: bela_bartok_competitions_for_horses.jpg (49KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 850x400px

>>75171179
>Grimes won.
See pic related.

>>75173594
Interesting.

>>75169322
No. Tammy Wynette is better than all of them.

>>75171507
Grimes is Grimes, there's no comparison, Leonardo is not Monet, but both are pantheon-tier.

>>75173017
How did that even get "popular"? That was awful.

>>75172050
Absolutely not. If Let England Shake had been stranger, yes, but she too often devolves back to rock structures.

>>75173973
Grimes was more subculturally relevant nack then, 2012 was a fucking terrible time

File: joanna.jpg (28KB, 337x295px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 337x295px

Oops.

>>75173017
Holy shit that was awful

File: KarenOYeahYeahYeahsGE030213-1.jpg (146KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 900x600px

>>75169322
*blocks your path*

>>75173973
>>75174917
Maybe you just have awful taste. Develop your taste a little and try again. Maybe you'll see the appeal of her music.
Try this too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fb_0LzBv894 It's more accessible.

>>75175872
It's her voice. Straight up trash.

>>75169322
>GRIMES
AAAAAAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH

>>75171179

You know who else is a singer who writes and produces his own songs? Charlie Puth. That doesn't mean the music's any good.

>>75176003
Kek

File: Blue.jpg (289KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 600x600px

no woman has come close to touching this

File: Esperanza_Spalding_on_North_Sea_Jazz_2012.jpg (3MB, 2551x3401px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2551x3401px

>>75169322
No.

Why does /mu/ have to have this thread every week

>>75178178
Why is grimes still a thing

>>75178217
Because she's the best and the most talented you faggot.

>>75169322
>Kate Bush and Bjork
It's like people just post these two artists for the sake of it.

>>75178178
That's what I want to know.
And it's always Kate Bush and Bjork posted religiously with no explanation. Lame as hell.

>>75171521
Dragging a Dead Deer Up a Hill and Ruins are incredible.

I've always loved anything by Vashti Bunyan

>>75169931
What picture of grimes have you came over?

File: 1497397102083.jpg (67KB, 500x620px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 500x620px

grimes is a gross haggard cave troll compared to kate, bjork, jun togawa, or miharu koshi.

>>75172050
This

if only the janitor wasn't a grimesfag as well sigh

>>75171724
>joni mitchell
>3rd tier
Why

>>75175274
this is bait right?

Last post was only 26 minutes bumping this cool thread idea

>>75173017
is this supposed to be edgy?

File: womenrachael.jpg (146KB, 640x320px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 640x320px

>>75169322

No.

t. Kate Bush fan

File: teeth.jpg (338KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 2560x1440px

>>75172427
Yeah Susy is great, but her teeth though

>>75170922
she looks like a fuckin bimbo

>>75182226
Ok

>>75180038
Grimes is loveliest of all

Stop comparing Grimes to Bush until she releases an album on par with The Dreaming or Hounds of Love. She's good herself sure, but it's just embarassing.

>>75182263
It's called Visions

>>75182274
Visions is vastly superior to those, she must release album on par with them.

>>75182036
No. It's supposed to sound different than Madonna. That was the point.
>>75182263
She already did Visions and Halfaxa which are far stronger and fresher albums than the dated The Dreaming or Hounds of Love.

>>75180038
Shit opinion. I can't take you seriously.

>>75176361
>That doesn't mean the music's any good.
Good or bad are subjective things. So?

File: Lili_Boulanger.png (101KB, 623x480px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 623x480px

>>75169322
wrong

>>75182362
You responded to yourself. Do you feel smart now?

i don't how anyone can compare grimes to kate bush or bjork.
grimes is just a meme. literally no one cares about her outside this one circle on the internet.

>>75180081
Karen O is a great female artist, why would that be bait?

>>75182504
You are transparent

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-RFunvF0mDw

File: 423459096653.jpg (28KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 500x500px

>>75182504
Objectively wrong opinion. Let me explain to you why with facts.

POPULARITY:
- Most views on YouTube:
Grimes: Genesis - 45 million views
https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=CANQFA%253D%253D&q=grimes

Bjork: All Is Full of Love - 18 million views
https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=CANQFA%253D%253D&q=bjork

Kate Bush: Wuthering Heights - about 27 million views
https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=CANQFA%253D%253D&q=kate+bush

- Facebook followers:
Grimes: 959K
fb/actuallygrimes

Bjork: 3.2M
fb/bjork

Kate Bush: 675K
fb/katebush

She's in their league, popularity wise if we count the online presence. It's true that Kate Bush and Bjork have much bigger and older fanbases - many of them don't even use internet that much.

ACCLAIM:
Grimes's latest album's Metascore: 88
Bjork's latest album's Metascore: 87
Kate Bush's latest album's Metascore: 80

Where is your god now?

>>75182675
I saw that >>75182647
Fuck off with your stupid copypasta level bullshit if you can't even get it right the first time.

>>75169322
Why are people still talking about grimes? STOP

>>75182712
I corrected Kate Bush's Metascore and I formatted the post a little. Stop being so triggered when you have no arguments.

>>75182715
Because she's relevant and great?
>STOP
You will get the opposite effect.

>>75182726
I'm not even trying to argue lol
That was my first post after lurking in this thread. I also never said I hated any of those artists, I like them all. Your post is just kind of stupid and I felt I had the right to point that out.

>>75182746
Just die, Cho-anon.

This anon >>75182675 here. That post has been based on 2 older ones from few weeks ago. At that time Genesis had 45 million and a bit and now it already has 46,631,589 views. Fuck, that song's popularity is growing fast.

>>75182417
I bet she makes one attractive corpse

>>75182768
You're the shitty fake Cho-anon. Leave this thread.

>>75182751
Why my post is stupid? It's just a bunch of facts with a few opinions here and there. When people say that Grimes is a nobody outside /mu/ they should think again. There's a reason why P4K selected Oblivion as their song of the year 2012.

>>75182802
Because your just taking Facebook followers, YouTube view and Metascores? Are you trying to say Grimes is better JUST because of that? Because those numbers have no meaning, popularity doesn't equal quality.

Claire

>>75182802
>There's a reason why P4K selected Oblivion as their song of the year 2012

Yes there really is

>>75182802
Pitchfork is fucking retarded though, who cares what their opinions are?

>>75182838
Dude, wake up. Popularity is measured using numbers.
>Are you trying to say Grimes is better JUST because of that?
I didn't say that or even implied that. The point wasn't even that. The point was that she's too obscure to be compared to Kate Bush and Bjork:
>grimes is just a meme. literally no one cares about her outside this one circle on the internet
I proved that claim is false using actual proof, not bullshitting like most /mu/ users.

>>75182899
Of course. The song was too good to not be number 1. That's the reason.
>>75182916
That's just your opinion. I dare to say it's completely irrelevant. Plenty of people care about their opinions because they're influential, like it or not.

>>75183015
Did she ask for that praise? It sounded kinda forced onto her.

>>75183035
She didn't ask for that. I'm fairly sure she was very surprised to get so much praise after a few years of being an underground artist and almost a nobody. Oblivion, its video and back story just struck a chord with many people. It's a gorgeous song flowing like a river. Its parent album Visions was amazing considering it was created in just a few weeks.

File: Screenshot_20170916-083622.jpg (835KB, 1440x2019px) Image search: [Google]

835KB, 1440x2019px

Might just be a singer and a songwriter but it's good shit

>>75183100
We're not meant to care

File: images-uploads-gallery-25_-_Lana_Del_Rey_-_Pola_Scan_low.jpg (506KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

506KB, 1000x1000px

>>75169322
replace grimes with pic related

Just here to make my daily comparison between Grimes and a sack of damp, putrid onions. He smells. Get it?

File: Imperfezione.jpg (63KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 960x960px

Unpopular opinion: This Meg should have more recognition

File: Impossible Princess.jpg (141KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1000x1000px

Also, not so unpopular opinion: What would music be like if this album had been successful and Kylie hadn't stopped doing personal, more artistic music?

File: 1504381799275.png (2MB, 1500x996px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x996px

>>75183704
Be nice to Claire.

>>75169322
CBC Band, Carol Kim > These 3 clowns.

>>75185601
Just doing my part to help get him into meme heaven.

File: folder.jpg (294KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 600x600px

Pic realated is also really good. I don't know if it's on their level yet, but still.

File: 05-paramore-press-photo-Lindsey-Byrnes-billboard-1548.jpg (56KB, 636x421px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 636x421px

You were saying?

>>75171179
>dancer, visual artist, and director
Nothing to do with how good the music is

>>75171724
Switch Grimes and Joni

>>75171836
any artist can be innovative, what has been the impact of her innovations?

>>75182675
>judging by latest album
why

>>75186575
>Nothing to do with how good the music is
Pleb. Music doesn't exist in void, it's linked with other art forms. Great artists like Bowie, Prince, Kate Bush, Bjork knew that very well.

>>75183015
What is Pitchfork influential upon other than easily-fooled /mu/tants and annoying hipsters

>>75186641
Because it's the most relevant now for this comparison. We're judging the current acclaim and popularity not the past one or based on past work. They already got their fair share of acclaim for their past work, now it's time to judge their current work.

>>75186660
Music is linked to other art forms but that link doesn't reflect on how quality the music is. Good music can be influenced by a terrible painting or a bad song can have an awesome music video, but that's not going to raise or lower the quality of the music.

>>75186705
You're arguing with someone who said that no one cares about Grimes, which is wrong. Comparing her at her peak with an artist whose peak popularity is over is nonsensical, compare all of them at their respective peaks if you want a reasonable comparison. If he said that people care more about Kate Bush now than they do Grimes it would make sense, but it doesn't for the argument you're making.

>>75186714
Dude, good music is subjective. You can't prove it that a piece of music is objectively good. If you like it, it's good, if you don't, it's not. Simple as that.

>>75184695
Ish buy I quite like that album

>>75186877
But if you like music because of associated visual arts, then you might as well just be listening to someone else's opinion and taking that. You're not making your own opinion on the music. Music is subjective, but even it's perceived quality is separate from the perceived quality of any associated visual arts.

>>75170922
/thread

>>75182226
You wouldn't numb-suck her asshole?

>>75186575
she's also terrible at all 3 of those

File: 1504356573794.gif (996KB, 500x283px) Image search: [Google]

996KB, 500x283px

>>75187438
Wrong

>>75187438
...said the NEET...

>>75187492
i don't know what this means.

>>75180016
I can't remember, but I think she had shorts and blonde hair in it. She had her legs slightly lifted, was seated and was looking up, I think.

File: 1493232767334.jpg (41KB, 513x307px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 513x307px

>139 replies and no Nico
Just fucking burn this board to the ground

>>75187492
>projection

>>75169322
I can't believe this thread is still up
christ what do you guys even talk about now this is like the 10th thread

I had never heard Grimes and decided to click on a link earlier in this thread (I think - there are so many Grimes threads!). Much as I want to admire her because she's sexually attractive to me and I love vulnerability and experiment in an artist, it sounded like a student with speech impediments singing in her dorm room over some FruityLoops beats. I think she'd be fun to hang out, take drugs and have dd/lg sex with, but I don't think she's a genius. However, I will keep listening and maybe I'll get what other people have heard in her.

>>75187544
The male love of female beauty is why.

>>75187552
This man gets it.

>>75187552
>>75187638
This is like saying that Loveless is just mumbling under guitar effects. Listen again later, maybe you'll get her appeal. Her music is a grower. It helps if you get into synthpop first.
>I don't think she's a genius
Not yet. Get into her music and we're talking again.

>>75187765
Loveless is literally mumbling and guitar effects though. It's at least good.

>>75187638
Thanks.

>>75187765
Well, Loveless impressed me the first time I heard it, is all I can say. I heard what was radical about it. I can't hear that yet with Grimes. And I love synthpop. Most of the music I rate is electronic.

>>75187835
Also I should just follow this by saying that the main thing about Loveless isn't intellectually thinking "this is radical", but being hit by its beauty. I was hit by its beauty immediately. I wasn't hit that way with the Grimes track I heard, but I am going to keep listening.

>>75186575
>learning how to dance isn't relevant to making dance music
Lol you aren't very smart, are you?

>>75186714
see
>>75187930

>>75187835
>And I love synthpop. Most of the music I rate is electronic.
That's a good thing. I didn't get her music at first either. It takes some time. That's why so many mu/users say she's terrible: they never gave her music a fair chance.

>>75186767
>compare all of them at their respective peaks.
Anon, you can't do that because all of these artists are still alive...

>>75171724
Replace grimes with Fiona Apple

File: Grimes - Visions.jpg (397KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

397KB, 1024x1024px

>>75187438
nigga tell me this aint cool as shit

>>75188054
She's too boring.
>>75188069
Not that nigga, but Visions is a spectacular album. I'll take it over any memerap, King Crimson and Radiohead album.

>>75169322
no
Adriana Hölszky
Allison Cameron
Annea Lockwood
Annette Schlünz
Annie Gosfield
Amy Beach
Barbara Benary
Barbara Strozzi
Bianca Maria Meda
Carla Bley
Carla Kihlstedt
Caroline Shaw
Cécile Charminade
Charlotte Moorman
Chaya Czernowin
Chen Yi
Clara Schumann
Daphne Oram
Delia Derbyshire
Diamanda Galás
Dobrinka Tabakova
Élizabeth-Claude Jacquet de la Guerre
Elizabeth Maconchy
Jennifer Higdon
Judith Weir
Elena Kats-Chernin
Elena Mendoza
Eliane Radigue
Elis Regina
Elizabeth Lutyens
Ellen Fullman
Ellen Taaffe Zwilich
Ethel Smyth
Eve Beglarian
Fanny Mendelssohn
Frances-Marie Uitti
Gabriela Lena Frank
Galina Ustvolskaya
Germaine Tailleferre
Gloria Coates
Grazyna Bacewicz
Haco
Ha-Yang Kim
Helena Tulve
Hildegard von Bingen
Isabel Mundry
Isabella Leonarda
Jennifer Higdon
Jenny Scheinman
Jessica Pavone
Jin Hi Kim
Joan La Barbara
Joan Tower
Julia Wolfe
Kaija Saariaho
Kassia
Lera Auerbach
Lili Boulanger
Liza Lim
Lois V Vierk
Louise Farrenc
Lydia Kavina
Maja Ratkje
Maria Schneider
Maria Szymanowska
Marian Zazeela
Mary Lou Williams
Maryanne Amacher
Meredith Monk
Michiyo Yagi
Miya Masaoka
Nadia Boulanger
Nina Senk
Okkyung Lee
Olga Neuwirth
Pauline Oliveros
Pia Gilbert
Rebecca Clarke
Rebecca Saunders
Regina Carter
Rosa Giacinta Badalla
Ruth Crawford Seeger
Sachiko M
Sainkho Namtchylakv
Sarah Kirkland Snider
Satoko Fujii
Sheila Silver
Sofia Gubaidulina
Sofia Jernberg
Susie Ibarra
Theresa Wong
Thea Musgrave
Unsuk Chin
Vanessa Lann
Wendy Carlos
Wu Fei
Wu Man
Yoko Ono
and Zeena Parkins are all better.

>>75182675
youtube view popularity isn't a great metric because grimes is a modern artist who has officially-uploaded music videos in consistent quality that everyone naturally flocks to. bjork and kate bush's most popular songs have likely been uploaded numerous times by various people in varying quality, some of those uploads having been deleted or taken down over the years, and the views are far more spread across these different versions.

>>75188190
Grimey BTFOs these losers

>>75188103
as the one who posted the album in the first place i would absolutely not take it over the majority of king crimson/radiohead albums even though i like grimes a lot

>>75188190
is this copy pasta?

>>75186962
>Music is subjective, but even it's perceived quality is separate from the perceived quality of any associated visual arts.
Different anon.
See this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv1ZPKscaiQ
Then see this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-lN8vWm3m0
Visual stimuli can have a direct effect on how you perceive visual stimuli - and vise-versa. Especially when you're talking about artworks (things created specifically to have psychological effects on people.)

t. Sensory Perception Student.

>>75187497
Thereby proving that you are, in fact, a NEET

>>75187863
>I wasn't hit that way with the Grimes track I heard
Which track, out of curiosity? I avoided her music for years because of only hearing certain tracks. Then totally flipped on my opinion of her music based on hearing some others that I loved, and have encountered many others with similar stories. Her stuff has a tendency to appeal to people on a very song-selective basis.

Why are women so terrible at making music?

wat about joanna newsom tho. i'd say she's better than grimes

File: 1486300199902s.jpg (7KB, 250x211px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x211px

>>75182675
No, THAT what you just posted is an objectively wrong post and you have huge flaws in your logical way of thinking. But you're both underage and black so I understand that you're hopeless.

When talking about each of these artists' popularity (and popularity =/= quality so I don't know why we are doing this but ok), you would always compare them with their contemporaries to see their actual popularity and relevance.

Kate Bush and Björk aren't that popular ANYMORE so it is obvious that they will lack in contemporary means of measuring popularity such as YouTube views and Facebook likes.

but: Björk and Kate Bush were both popular in their RESPECTIVE decades (so 80's for Kate, 90's for Björk) when compared to many of their peers while Grimes is a literal who and nobody when compared to her own peers in 2010's.

Let me explain to you why with facts.

POPULARITY:
- Most views on YouTube
Taylor Swift: Shake It Off - 2.4 billion views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfWlot6h_JM

Katy Perry: Roar - 2.26 billion views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CevxZvSJLk8

Adele: Hello - 2.06 billion views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQHsXMglC9A

Shakira: Chantaje - 1.80 billion views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Mgqbai3fKo

Grimes: Genesis - 45 million (0.045 billion) views
https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=CANQFA%253D%253D&q=grimes


- Facebook followers:
Taylor Swift: 74 million
fb/taylorswift

Katy Perry: 69 million
fb/katyperry

Adele: 65 million
fb/adele

Shakira: 104 million
fb/shakira

Grimes: 959 thousand (0.959 million)
fb/actuallygrimes


Where is your god now?

>>75182374
No they are not, the only subjective thing is your shitty taste

>>75188404
How is yorubafag ever going to recover from this?

File: 1504362332168.jpg (70KB, 400x523px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 400x523px

>>75188404
Grimey: Writes her own music

Haters BTFO by Big Bucks Boucher

>>75188392
Her voice is like a cheese grater.

Nah. People like Kate Bush, Bjork, Grimes, Joanna, etc are pseudo-intellectual garbage. They are not smart enough to make the kind of music these artists that >>75188190 anon mentioned have made, while at the same time their music isn't on the fun bumping pop level of guys like Taylor Swift, Rihanna, Madonna, and Lady Gaga. Absolutely irredeemable filth that does nothing good at all.

>>75188459
So does Taylor you retard, and she's the most popular one of them all. Also all the rest's music isn't garbage like ugly fucker Grimes.

>>75188190

>Yoko Ono

Shit tier copypasta

File: Wimmen.jpg (732KB, 1575x1200px) Image search: [Google]

732KB, 1575x1200px

>>75169322

File: grimes_eating_an_apple.jpg (655KB, 712x1080px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 712x1080px

>>75188054
Why?

>>75188482
>implying Yoko's contributions to the Fluxus movement aren't more important to music itself than anything Bush, Bjork, and Grimes combined have made

>>75187930
actually it isn't. most styles of dance are based on a certain rhythm and as long as that rhythm is maintained, you don't need to necessarily dance to it.

>>75188304
Okay

>>75188488
All image, zero musical quality.

File: 1505459543039.png (462KB, 938x643px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 938x643px

>>75188473
Grimey: Makes and produces her own music

Haters continue to be BTFO by Big Bucks Boucher

>>75188392
Literally everybody would say Joanna is better than Grimes. They're not even close.

>>75171836
jesus you must be really desperate for that talentless canuck to be shilling her shit music on a bangladeshi landscaping forum

>>75188513
Art Angel has four others on mixing/mastering duty wtf are you on? You Grimesfags are fucking retarded.

>>75188496
Literally a "movement" of self congratulatory up-they're-own-arses echo chamber "artists" shitting out worthless crap (for the most part) meant to fool the naive into thinking how genius they are.

File: 1505596640215.png (12KB, 160x160px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 160x160px

>>75188549
You seem to know a lot about Grimes.

>>75171836
>and her innovative music
Define innovative.

>>75188372
Probably because people like you are terrible at hearing it

>>75188482
>yoko ono is the only artist I recognise so the list is shit

>>75188578
Nothing anyone that isn't fucking stupid can't look up.

>>75188557
>implying Fluxus didn't have a huge influence on later non-academic experimental music ranging from the Japanese scene to a New York artist like Glenn Branca
Stick to your worthless pop Bjork garbage.

>>75183365
This nigga gets it

>>75188512
can you improve upon your opinion?

>>75188653
>to a New York artist like Glenn Branca
Wow, they inspired more:

>self congratulatory up-they're-own-arses echo chamber "artists" shitting out worthless crap (for the most part) meant to fool the naive into thinking how genius they are.

>>75188691
>can't into harmonic overtones and their affect on drones
Like I said, stick to basic pop garbage.

>>75188675
It's an insult to the female race to say that the best it can do is unoriginal indie garbage that only appeals to people who care for fashion over music when they have done so much more.

Why won't people be nice to Claire?!

>>75188721
If I want drone I'll listen to the much more listenable John Cale. Music that's designed to sound shit because it's "experimental" is like the Damien Hurst of music.

>>75188764
John Cale is that similar ideas but heavily watered down for plebs because they can't into the more intricate ideas in that style. Cale doesn't offer anything actually new nor interesting in that field.
>Music that's designed to sound shit because it's "experimental" is like the Damien Hurst of music.
People who believe this are extremely narrow minded in their perception of music and base their opinions on their pathetically small pop music listening experience rather than being veteran listeners who have a good attention to detail musically and don't shy away at abrasion or atonality realizing that those are just another perspective/approach to music, nothing objectively bad.

>>75188203
Grimey is far superior and has an impeccable sense of melody.

>>75188810
>Cale doesn't offer anything actually new nor interesting in that field.

Except being one of it's earliest pioneers and basically defining what Drone even is... But yes, didn't offer anything to the field amirite?

>abrasion or atonality realizing that those are just another perspective/approach to music, nothing objectively bad.

Music can be abrasive and atonal, but still be a good listen. Those going beyond that are, as I said, the music world's Damien Hurts. Complete unoriginal hacks, with wealthy pretentious patrons.

>>75188404
>comparing an indie artist to mainstream corporate-tier juggernauts
Different anon. The fact that you'd actually attempt to present this as a serious comparison is really just a compliment to Grimes.
Look at it this way. Both Kate Bush and Björk received corporate-tier juggernaut levels of attention during the premiering decades of their careers (the 80s and 90s respectively) and have had DECADES of successful music-making since then with which to grow dedicated followings. The fact that Grimes is within these peoples' league despite still being a thoroughly indie artist is an EXTREMELY impressive feat - and also pretty much unprecedented. Notice how no one ever even bothers to try and make serious popularity comparisons between Grimes and other artists (like Angel Olsen) actually on a similar indie level. Because Grimes is simply in a higher talent bracket.

>>75188498
>actually it isn't.
Like I said - intelligence seems to have passed over your particular generation in your family.

>>75188530
Where in Bangladesh are you from?

I wood give my left asshole to hear that track

File: 235435623654.png (622KB, 552x701px) Image search: [Google]

622KB, 552x701px

>>75188404
Hold on a minute. Be prepared to be BTFO.

>But you're both underage and black so I understand that you're hopeless.
None of that is true. You're just projecting your own insecurities.

>When talking about each of these artists' popularity (and popularity =/= quality so I don't know why we are doing this but ok), you would always compare them with their contemporaries to see their actual popularity and relevance.
WTF, Bjork and Kate are still alive, bro. I compare her with relevant art pop artists, not with mainstream popstars like Taylor Swift. Bjork and Kate are STILL relevant and are still art pop, just like Grimey.

>Kate Bush and Björk aren't that popular ANYMORE so it is obvious that they will lack in contemporary means of measuring popularity such as YouTube views and Facebook likes.
I already covered that:
>She's in their league, popularity wise if we count the online presence. It's true that Kate Bush and Bjork have much bigger and older fanbases - many of them don't even use internet that much.

>but: Björk and Kate Bush were both popular in their RESPECTIVE decades (so 80's for Kate, 90's for Björk) when compared to many of their peers
True. They're still popular now. And Grimes is fairly popular for her decade and according to her indie status.

>while Grimes is a literal who and nobody when compared to her own peers in 2010's.
That's complete bullshit. Her peers are OTHER ART POP ARTISTS or other INDIE ARTISTS. Your list is invalid because THOSE AREN'T HER PEERS. Hence, your post is manure at best. Her peers are artists like Crystal Castles, Purity Ring, iamamiwhoami, FKA Twigs, Janelle Monae. Check their stats and you'll see they're comparable. BTW, the real 80s/90s peers of Adele, Katy Perry, Shakira, Taylor Swift were Kylie, Madonna, Whitney, Mariah, Janet Jackson etc. DON'T MIX THE MAINSTREAM AND INDIE BAGS, BRUH.

Where is your god now?

File: quirky-courtney.jpg (60KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x450px

Reminder that there's literally nothing this woman couldn't do.

>>75189081
GRIMEY HATERS BTFO

>>75189107
average guitarist who makes rudimentary indie rock, no thanks

>>75189136
This

>>75188549
Mixing/mastering aren't part of the artistic music-making process (unlike e.g. sound production.) They are technical crafts best practices by dedicated craftsmen - NOT artists. Hence why Grammy nominations for things like mixing and mastering are determined by CRAFT committees rather than regular voters. Because mixing and mastering are objective crafts - not subjective artforms.

File: courtney-barnett_4.jpg (854KB, 2400x1600px) Image search: [Google]

854KB, 2400x1600px

>>75189162
>being this mundane

File: 1502968727587.png (3MB, 1278x1920px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1278x1920px

>>75188392
>>75188525
Not even close? This is what Joanna herself said about Grimey:
>I loved the latest Bjork album, I'm excited about the idea of Grimes. I haven't wrapped my head around the record. I find her so compelling and so unlike anybody else and so incredibly talented, skilled, and fun. I love her. I met her in LA a few months ago, she told me something along the lines of, "I grew up listening to your music". I will say, it made me feel really old for about five minutes, then it made me feel really happy. I was like well, I guess I'm old now, but that's okay because this awesome and amazing young musician likes my music and said that it was special to her when she was younger, so that's great.

>I started to think of it as waveforms. The violin is not an uglier sound than the flute, it’s just a jagged waveform instead of a smooth waveform. There are certain things that, musically, I prefer over others: I like music that is in tune, I prefer when singers are in tune, I prefer when I’m in tune. In terms of people today, as I said, I’m a little out of the loop, but I have noticed I’m really excited by the way that Grimes frames herself, and seems utterly disinterested in her own beauty, which is really exciting to me. Sometimes it’s useful for an idea, and then other times it’s not useful for an idea, and she seems unaffected either way. I like her music as well, and I like what she says.

>I’m super excited that Grimes is getting so much attention for her amazing production too because she’s super, super talented. And she does everything! She produces completely on her own.

>inb4 joanna has shit taste
Stick your excuses where the sun doesn't shine.

File: img.png (33KB, 851x278px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 851x278px

>>75188549
>mixing/mastering duty
Dude, that's a technical job, not an artistic one. That's separate from singing/songwriting/production. Not even Aphex Twin or whatever electronic artists does that.

Where is your god now?

>>75188473
Why are you so mad, anon? Perhaps because you know very well how wrong you are?

>>75188915
>Except being one of it's earliest pioneers and basically defining what Drone even is
No you retard. First of all, drone itself has existed and been widely used for hundreds if not about a thousand or so years. Second, Cale, like I said, took the ideas of drone from the Fluxus guys and the academic New York guys. Like I said, stick to boring ass pop, you have no clue wtf you are talking about.
>Those going beyond that are, as I said, the music world's Damien Hurts.
What's wrong with going "beyond that"? How dare somebody go "beyond" anything and try out new ideas?
>Complete unoriginal hacks
Already proved yourself wrong with the earlier statement.
>with wealthy pretentious patrons
Fluxus was completely non-academic though and thus didn't get crazy money grants or anything at all.

>>75188750
She makes most other musicians seem like lazy, underachieving slackers. Which, in all fairness, is something most of these whiny type-people actually are.

>>75182263

Hounds of Love is one of the greatest albums of all time. FACT!

>>75188463
You're just a pretentious hipster who "suffers" from too much arrogance self satisfaction. Enjoy your shitty music that no one cares about. And stop bragging about your literal whos.

>>75173978
>the further you deviate from rock archetypes the better the music is
Nah, son. Let England Shake is good BECAUSE of how it unifies rock types with history and and english folksong types

>>75188488
Unironically great chart. But it needs Grimes.

>>75189360
t. clueless philistine

>>75189221
>>75189270
>missing the whole point of my post
As usual, you guys are idiots. I was making a point that Taylor also is the main creative head in all her projects, and is far more popular, and also makes music that is good at what it does (simple basic pop music you can dance to and shit.) Grimes is too busy trying to be intellectual and tryhard with her music, thus it has neither the intellectual backing nor the visceral one.
>>75189310
Nah, it's just fascinating to see how stupid Grimesfags really are. At first I used to think it was all a troll. But now I have realized that they must be legit "never leave mom's basement" levels of autistic.

File: LOL.png (30KB, 717x189px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 717x189px

>>75188491
>>75188054
LOL!!

>>75189414
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Keep your hipster points that worth shit.

>>75189360
Nope, I like music for what it can offer in the realm of engagement. Stuff like Bush, Grimes, Bjork aren't really good at offering anything at all.
>And stop bragging about your literal whos
>Taylor Swift
>Rihanna
>Madonna
>Lady Gaga
>literal whos
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

File: 45374547.jpg (39KB, 431x450px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 431x450px

>>75189415
>But now I have realized that they must be legit "never leave mom's basement" levels of autistic.
Projecting much, NEET? Stay mad, dip.
>Nah, it's just fascinating to see how stupid Grimesfags really are.
So, are they stupid because they have different opinions than yours? Lame.

>>75189492
>Projecting much, NEET? Stay mad, dip.
Not projection, just seeing how these people are reacting.
>So, are they stupid because they have different opinions than yours? Lame.
Nope, because they are unable to follow along with what I am saying when I am saying it pretty clearly.

>>75189448
You must be stupid if you didn't get the fact that I referred to this list >>75188190 that you quoted.

>>75189514
>when I am saying it pretty clearly.
It's clear in your convoluted mind. Don't assume you spoke clearly.

>>75189519
You said stop bragging about your literal whos. Those I "bragged about" (I wasn't even bragging good god you people need to either learn english or kill yourselves) also included highly mainstream artists. But I'll be nice and imply that you meant that one long list, in which case you're bringing an even worse argument by saying that popularity means more than musical quality in which case you really should kill yourself.

File: chelsea-wolfe-foto-johanna-torell-770x470.jpg (77KB, 770x470px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 770x470px

Chelsea Wolfe

>>75189533
>can't even follow chains of posts
Is this how such a small number of you Grimesfags have so many posts within a topic?

>>75189350
Tbh I have yet to be able to get into Kate Bush's discography. I like her and it in theory, but her music just sounds incredibly dated to the 80s to me in a thoroughly NOT good kind of way.

>>75189415
>Grimes is too busy trying to be intellectual and tryhard with her music, thus it has neither the intellectual backing nor the visceral one.
How wrong could you be? Check out this thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xgl9gee7KY
Intellectual and visceral at the same time.

>What particular trauma was ‘Be A Body’ about?
>That’s one of the only happy songs on the album. It’s about physical existence, and sex, and being alive. I’m really opposed to phones, I’m opposed to checking my email. I just think it’s really unflattering that everyone’s always on their computer. ‘Be A Body’ is about physical, sensual existence and about having physical pain and pleasure. It’s about existence. As pretentious as it is, it’s based on a Thomas Aquinas quote where he was trying to talk about how in Medieval Christian thought everyone was super into ‘fuck my life, my physical body is a horrible thing and a representation of sin’, and there’s a passage where Aquinas said “Be a body” and i just thought it was so sick, so bad-ass that he would just say that, just give that straight-up imperative. He was a hip guy.

>So it’s a celebratory song.
>Yes, but it’s also an assault. It’s me being aggressive.

Where is your god now?

>>75189444
You have to be a completely tastless retard to unironically believe that people would listen to the most significant female composers only for "hipster points"

>>75189561
>Those I "bragged about" (I wasn't even bragging good god you people need to either learn english or kill yourselves)
You're wrong:
>brag about someone or something
>to boast about someone or something; to talk proudly about someone or something. He bragged about how selfish he was. Jill brags a lot about her kids.
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/brag+about
Follow your own retarded advice, dipshit.

You stupid fuck also said:
>Nah. People like Kate Bush, Bjork, Grimes, Joanna, etc are pseudo-intellectual garbage. They are not smart enough to make the kind of music these artists that >>75188190 anon mentioned have made
You clearly bragged about that list of literal whos. Now shut the fuck up.

>>75189415
>the main creative head in all her projects,
>has released albums with whole songs on them she had absolutely no part in writing
Anon, a point has to be based on something valid in order for it to be made.

>>75189647
>Intellectual and visceral at the same time.
The song consists of just a small handful of layers of things happening at once, with the melodic cadences not being longer than two measures long. Right when things might get more interesting, she makes the song simple again. Nothing intellectually/cerebrally stimulating about that. It's certainly not visceral with how airy those synths are, how late the beat shows up, and the general lack of up beat feel in the rhythms until halfway through the track (which even then doesn't come close to the kind of rhythmic work one will hear for Rihanna.)

>>75189423
Yeah, it took you guys almost an hour...

File: 420843d720e78daa308d19054f71e950.jpg (319KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 500x667px

>>75169322
Marina is better

>>75189715
I wasn't boasting though, idiot. Just giving my view on the artists. How can someone saying a certain thing isn't to his preference then mentioning what is to his preference and why it is so a form of boasting? Fuck off with that garbage.

>>75189769
Let''s put it this way: it's not visceral and intellectual enough to you. Happy now?

>>75189657
>You have to be a completely tastless retard
... You mean a hipster?

>>75189731
Swift has writing credit on almost everything she has done. On records where she doesn't have producer credit on everything, she's still exec producer, meaning that everything is still under her control and she chooses how it's done.

>>75176496
incredible album, I think The Dreaming is equal to it though, and Hounds of Love and Hissing of Summer Lawns are top tier too

>>75189769
>Nothing intellectually/cerebrally stimulating
What key is it in?

>>75189828
You indirectly boasted about your precious literal whos artists. You said
>They are not smart enough to make the kind of music these artists that >>75188190 anon mentioned have made
Like you have superior taste to like that crap instead on that good music which you described it as:
>People like Kate Bush, Bjork, Grimes, Joanna, etc are pseudo-intellectual garbage.
Admit defeat and stfu, you pretentious fuck.

>>75189846
Yes, like the ones who like beige "alt"-pop musicians like Grimes, Bjork, Bush etc

>>75189912
>admit defeat
>admit defeat
>admit defeat

By saying this phrase, you just outed yourself of being underage. Enjoy your ban for evading global rule 2, idiot.

>>75189833
I mean, yeah it can be for you. But that still doesn't entail being among best female artists.
>>75189892
F major

>>75189912
But both statements are critiques of the artists, not some kind of boasts.

>>75189859
>Swift has writing credit on almost everything she has done.

Again, how old *are* you?

Elvis did this, Al Jolson did it. The singer takes a cut of the publishing for introducing the songs. Check out Taylor's collaborators and you find guys thirty years older than her who she has no reason to know socially, who have been in the industry a long time, co-wrote with a bunch of other, disparate people, and got their first credits on 1987 KISS albums.

>>75189769
>melodic cadences not being longer than two measures
...Anon, the base time segment of that song is FOUR bars - not two.
Granted, since you're goto reference point for music theory is apparently Rihanna, I guess it's no surprise you can't even count.

>>75188365
Be a Body.

>>75190017
Cool thing I was talking about the melody that comes in later in the track and not the four measure synth chord play that starts the song, right?
>>75190012
How old are you to not know that her being her own songwriter has been a thing for years and was one of the reasons she got popular early (as that's where her parents money helped her go into.)

>>75190012
Now you're gonna tell me that Kanye has zero creative input in his stuff, too because he has the names of other producers in his records. Oh wait, you won't, because you're on a site that worships the guy even though he has FAR more producers on his stuff than the other guys that are on Taylor's records.

>>75189371
Nope. It detracts credibility from itself, she can't even stop doing that fake American accent. Logically, it should have sounded like White Chalk 2 with a little later Talk Talk/Mark Hollis thrown in, and instead it sounded like 90s alternative rock.

>>75189859
>Swift has writing credit on almost everything she has done.
And NO writing credit on the stuff that she didn't.
>she chooses how it's done.
You can't retroactively choose how someone else does something. Only approve/reject things they've already done without you. Good directors of other people doing things for them are good directors of other people doing things for them - not good at doing the actual things being done.

>this whole thread
Why are grimes fags so autistic in their desperate defense of her. Like calm tf down lol

>>75189928
>being this wrong
Grimes, Bjork, Bush are colorful artists. Did you even listen to their diverse discographies?

>>75190113
Kanye is a hack tho

>>75169322
Many better than Grimes.

>>75190144
>And NO writing credit on the stuff that she didn't.
Except she has writing credit on everything that has been released on LP.
>not good at doing the actual things being done
This is clearly not true of the person who has writing credit on every track, and production credit on most tracks (if not then exec production credit.) The only reason you guys are trying to make this an argument instead of the music is because you know Taylor is far superior to Grimes in terms of quality.

>>75189614
Then start with her actual start - The Kick Inside from 1978. Listen to the first two albums. Then listen to the third. Then, after you're sure you're ready, listen to The Dreaming. The use made of the 80s technology there is so dense and artistically uncompromising that the 80s sound of Hounds of Love will seem less corny to you - because you'll know it's all being done with definite aesthetic intentions, not to follow fashion.

She never did a better album than The Dreaming, but fortunately nobody else has, so she doesn't need to worry about topping it.

>>75170956
This.

>>75190113
Sorry, if we're going to talk about hip hop artists, who usually either make beats OR rap, rarely both, then you're admitting Swift's contribution is minimal.

imo Kate Bush is on some elder god tier by herself

then you have people like Patti Smith, Nico, maybe Bjork
get the contemporary shit outta the discussion

>>75190098
>How old are you to not know that her being her own songwriter has been a thing for years and was one of the reasons she got popular early (as that's where her parents money helped her go into.)

OK, when did she stop being the sole credited composer?

>>75190264
Not at all. This is false equivalence as I used Kanye West as an example, someone known to be a producer rapper, not some 80s dude.

>>75190164
It's only yorubafag, he spends 10 hours a day on this board fiercely defending her

>>75190313
You're memeing.

>>75190275
Agreed. The only artist in any medium, male or female, who I feel in awe of to the point of being slightly scared. That sounds pathetic but I'm willing to say it. My life can be divided into before and after I started listening to her.

>>75190292
>OK, when did she stop being the sole credited composer?
She still gets sole credits to this day. It becomes obvious that throughout her career, the other credits are probably just "oh you should probably just move this one part a tiny bit to the left" or something insignificant like that. None of which should honestly matter as the end result is still >>>>>>>> Grimeth

>>75190301
No, again, if Taylor Swift is a songwriter, why is she never credited alone? Who else has she written for?

>>75190199
>you know Taylor is far superior to Grimes in terms of quality.
I didn't hear a more stupid thing this month. Her latest singles aren't even 1/1000 as good as Oblivion. Tay Tay is just generic pop, Grimes is art. That's the difference.

>>75190359
Oh right, you're b8ing, fine.

>>75189984
>F major
>mfw I'm surrounded by tone deaf amateurs
Yeah... just as I suspected. Be a Body is in C MINOR with certain key sections of the song (such as starting at 0:07) being in two different, harmonically dissonant keys at the same time.
Go listen to some more Rihanna.

I guess this thread has devolved into guys who masturbate to pictures of Taylor Swift and/or Grimes pretending to have passionate convictions about their music for keks. I mean, no adult thinks that Taylor Swift is a songwriter, any more than Adele or Britney Spears is. She's a gay model who pretends to have relationships with various male stars for set periods in the celebrity columns so that the break-up and love songs her company provides her with have a plausible "inspiration" and are forgiven - being "personal expressions" - for being as pallid and shopworn as you'd expect of stuff written to order by fifty-somethings.

>>75190366
>No, again, if Taylor Swift is a songwriter, why is she never credited alone?
She has. Most of the her stuff is just her. Fucking look this shit up.
>Who else has she written for?
>Doesn't remember the drama from earlier this year related to Calvin Harris and her anonymous songwriting credit
>>75190375
>>75190387
Nah, Grimes just making boring stuff that tries to be quirky or smart yet fails at both. Tay Tay knows what she's doing, and she's gonna make those bangers banging.

>>75190098
>Cool thing I was talking about the melody that comes in later in the track
Which is also built on a 4 bar-minimum length phrase.

>>75171724
>The girl from Dead Can Dance
>2nd tier

I thought we weren't supposed to talk about good music on this board

>>75190443
>>Doesn't remember the drama from earlier this year related to Calvin Harris and her anonymous songwriting credit

I'm 32, I don't follow this shit.

>>75190036
What other kinds of music/genres/artists do you listen to?

>>75190419
Oooh yeah my bad. It's C minor. Forgot the Ab in there. That's on me, I am humble enough (unlike you losers) to admit that.
>being in two different, harmonically dissonant keys at the same time.
>adding a bassline makes it two different keys
Aaaaaaaaaand that's where you lose your credibility after gaining it. The bass is very much in key.

>>75190475
No it's not. Each cadence of it is two bars, idiot.
>>75190486
This isn't an age thing. It's a talking to/interacting with others in the real world thing.

>>75190497
I listen to mostly old stuff, this year. Lennon's solo stuff, Nick Drake. I like a lot of electronic music, and I'll go back to Grimes and listen more, but it's been an old-music period for me of late.

>>75190113
>you're gonna tell me that Kanye has zero creative input in his stuff,
Around 23% I'd say. Probably not all that much more than TS desu (who I'd venture a guess at around 18%.)

>>75190544
No, it's genuinely an age thing, adults don't talk about Taylor Swift having beef with Calvin Harris, they're too busy working for a living. If I was a teenage girl, maybe.

>>75190164
>stop actually talking about musicians/music-making on /mu
lol

>>75190553
Someone else dealing with reality, thank fuck for that.

>>75190565
Yeah, because adults only work and sleep. Do absolutely nothing else at all. THAT, is how we know you're an underage.

>>75190553
But Taylor has had sole writing credit for the majority of her career?

>>75190596
Your IQ is 75

>>75190596
No, when I talk to people socially, I don't talk to the kind of people who care what Taylor Swift is doing, I'm not a child molester.

>>75190611
Remember how Michael Jackson apparently composed and arranged entire songs without ever having been seen to play an instrument, and how he mysteriously lost the ability to do it at all well at the same time that he stopped working with decades-older songwriter/arranger/producer Quincy Jones?

That.

>>75190628
If mine is 75, then I don't think yours ends up in positive numbers, my friend.
>>75190633
But we already went over the fact that it was something people of all ages know of. You're going in circles like a typical idiotic Grimesfag.

>>75190674
Your IQ is 62

>>75190665
Jones had production credit on everything from that time period while Jackson didn't even have writing credit on all the songs. This is different from Tay who does have writing credit on everything and most production too. It's ridiculous how far you guys are going over this one tiny point which will not make it true that Grimes music is better than Tay Tay's

>>75190674
No, we didn't go over that fact because it isn't a fact. Celebrity beef is for teenagers and the incredibly retarded. I don't know or work with either group, so I never heard of it. I *suspect* that the situation was manufactured to foster the impression that Swift is an actual songwriter, like SIA.

>>75190359
>None of which should honestly matter as the end result is still >>>>>>>> Grimeth
You're getting ridiculous. The end result is just generic mainstream pop.

>>75190443
>Nah, Grimes just making boring stuff that tries to be quirky or smart yet fails at both. Tay Tay knows what she's doing, and she's gonna make those bangers banging.
Bangers? Kill V. Maim wipes the floor with ANY Tay Tay "banger".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2EJMd7ZN7w

How could Tay Tay even compare?

>>75188733
Pretty sure this came from a waifu thread, don't get too upset

>>75190710
>Jones had production credit on everything from that time period while Jackson didn't even have writing credit on all the songs. This is different from Tay who does have writing credit on everything and most production too.

Yeah, they learned not to repeat their mistakes. These days, Jackson would be credited as co-writer. Madonna demonstrated the right way to go about it.

I'm not even a Grimes fan, I just think it's ridiculous to refer to a pop act as an example of an indie act falling short. Grimes is clearly an indie person, however well or badly she does what she does, she isn't a model hired by a record company to front generic pop records written by salaried hacks. I don't even listen to Grimes, I just think what you're doing is ridiculous if you're not memeing, which you are.

>>75190779
>Bangers? Kill V. Maim wipes the floor with ANY Tay Tay "banger"... How could Tay Tay even compare?

Christ I've been ignoring the back and forth arguments in this thread but how old are the people who post this shit?

Anyway, I gtg do stuff. I have a life after all. Stay eternally btfo Grimesfags, Bushfags, Joanna fags, Bjorkies, Holterfags, and fags of any other pseudo intellectual garbage musician.

>>75190730
>thinks it's just a beef
Lmao. Of course Grimesfags know nothing about the songwriting process and who gets credit how.
>>75190758
Generic pop done well>>>>>>>>>shitty attempts at being quirky
>>75190779
With vocals that sound like a baby who just learned to speak, that's not possible.

>>75190870
I'm not a Grimesfag, I just think discussing Grimes, Bjork and Bush is more interesting than talking about Taylor Swift, and I say that as a man who would drink her piss and tongue her asshole. She's not in the running.

>>75190829
>Yeah, they learned not to repeat their mistakes. These days, Jackson would be credited as co-writer. Madonna demonstrated the right way to go about it.
This would make sense if Tay Tay didn't get SOLE writer credit. Grimes fags eternally stupid as fuck.
>I'm not even a Grimes fan
Uh huh
>I just think it's ridiculous to refer to a pop act as an example of an indie act falling short
Pop is pop whether it's mainstream or indie. And Grimes falls short.

>>75190902
I don't listen to Grimes. I wasn't here to talk about how great Grimes is, I don't know enough about her, I just know that she's an indie artist who writes her songs, and Taylor Swift co-writes with guys who played keyboards for Christopher Cross.

Probably.

>>75189579
this

This is even more autistic than me and Cho-anon.

>>75190199
>This is clearly not true of the person who has writing credit on every track
You mean like Grimes?

>Except she has writing credit on everything
Clearly she starts song ideas and then farms them off to other, more accomplished/skilled songwriters to finish for her. Which is a sight more involvement than most corporatized pop-stars even near her level. She might not be in Grimes' league when it comes to authorship, but imo she's actually in a pretty good place when you compare her to her actual peers.

>production credit on most tracks
Why does Taylor Swift have not a single solo production credit on ANY song from her entire discography?
[spoiler]Because she clearly isn't capable of doing that by herself.[/spoiler]
Which isn't a be-all and end-all of good music-making. However it does put her in a distinctly inferior class of artist to Grimes when it comes to musical skill and creativity.

>far superior to Grimes in terms of quality.
Quality =/= popularity
Quality is subjective. Popularity is objective (when stats are available.) No one here is disputing that Taylor Swift is MUCH more popular than Grimes. Nice failed argument.

>>75190870
>With vocals that sound like a baby who just learned to speak, that's not possible.
Pleb detected. What about Joanna Newsom's vocals then?

>>75190438
see
>>75190579

>>75190522
>adding a bassline makes it two different keys
The bassline is IN the primary key (C minor.) Again - go harmonically analyze more Rihanna singles.

>>75191373
This. So apparently vocals have to be conventionally pleasant to your ears or they're not good music? Give us a break.

>>75190522
>The bass is very much in key.
Yes. The backing synth which starts the song and functions as the timbral backbone for much of it is what's in a different clashing key. Hence why the song counts as being in two different keys at the same time.

>>75190544
>Each cadence of it is two bars
Anon, unless you're counting things in half time everything in that song is built from 4-measure minimum phrases.

>>75190551
>and I'll go back to Grimes and listen more
If/when you do, I suggest starting with her early stuff (Geidi Primes) and working forward chronologically. Imo so far that is when her stuff was the most songwriter-ly (how I'd describe the artists you just cited.) Also, bit of a side-track, you might wanna check out some of Claire Hamill's 70s stuff - gives me strong Nick Drake vibes (plus there's a direct Grimes influence connection there fwiw.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZW0wGTe81w

>>75190544
>>75191680
I'm genuinely curious, what do either of you care how much a bar lasts or even what the BPM is when there is no score and you can't know anyway?

>>75190589
Yeah. Believe it or not, not everyone who posts here is a drone.

>>75190611
see paragraphs 2 and 3 of >>75191337
Fwiw, I'm actually a lukewarm Taylor Swift fan. However I believe in calling a spade a spade. And there is NO way you can say with a straight face that Taylor Swift > Grimes in any significant musical fashion (except as vocalists) unless what you really mean by "Taylor Swift" is Taylor Swift Incorporated - which is just comparing apples to oranges.

>>75191851
>what do either of you care how much a bar lasts or even what the BPM is
Fucking loooooool'ing for real rn

Do you even know why this board is named /mu?

>>75191851
>not understanding why people would want to talk about music on a music discussion board
That's it - I'm out for now. Not a bad thread, though.

>>75191337
>Clearly she starts song ideas and then farms them off to other, more accomplished/skilled songwriters to finish for her. Which is a sight more involvement than most corporatized pop-stars even near her level

Don't they all basically do that? They all seem to have writing credits these days, presumably on the basis of a similar arrangement.

>>75192028
>And there is NO way you can say with a straight face that Taylor Swift > Grimes in any significant musical fashion (except as vocalists) unless what you really mean by "Taylor Swift" is Taylor Swift Incorporated - which is just comparing apples to oranges.
He's either a big Taylor fan or he's trolling. Anyone in their right mind would see that Grimes is far superior.

>>75191373
>>75191503

Hey guys, I'm not the person you're reacting to, in fact I'm the person he was arguing with in that post, but I must say, Joanna Newsom's original vocal approach, which she's toned down, did irk me on first hearing because it was clearly contrived. I eventually got to love it, but it was chosen, as is obvious when you see her live and see that she has to make a Popeye face to sound that way.

>>75191801
I will, I always listen chronologically when I'm listening to people properly.

Thanks, I remember listening to "Speedbreaker" because of the John Martyn connection and not getting much from it, particularly her voice, but I'll give her more of a listen.

>>75192091
>>75192169
The song can be made to sound literally exactly the same while being written on twice as fast a BPM and bars that last twice as long. What do either of you know in what time signature and BPM the song was written in? Because you seemed to be very sure, and I'm wondering how.
And I'm the idiot here.

>>75191851
You should be able to tell how long a bar is, man.

>>75192255
It's not really a matter of superior, is it? It's apples and oranges.

>>75192341
No, you can't, you just guess based on where loops start and end. But the loop can be there as many times you want in a bar, or even take many bars to complete.
Unless you are explicitly told you make a practical arbitrary guess then discuss the music from there. These two sounded like they saw the sequencer with their own eyes.

I know enough music theory to know that much.

>>75192441
Then you don't know enough music theory. In fact, I'm not sure you know what a bar is.

File: Screenshot_20170916_222446.png (8KB, 735x137px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 735x137px

>>75192568
Look at this pretty score I made for you.
If I played this to you and didn't show you the score, how would you know the time signatures and BPM I chose?

Anneke Van Gierbergen in Devin Townsend's work is nothing short of stunning. She's got an amazing voice that I feel is wasted on her solo stuff, but with Townsend she is amazing.

>>75192321
>I always listen chronologically
Kudos to that. Imo it's always SO MUCH more interesting to hear an artists discog chronologically and in its entirety on first listen. I gives the music a whole new dimension since you get to hear how the artist progresses through their sound.

>not getting much from it, particularly her voice
Hey, liking/disliking human voices is very much a matter of taste. Especially with high-pitched ones (and that's science confirmed.) Fwiw Claire Hamill also had a landmark experimental phase in the late 80s (still can't believe Bjork got away with ripping off her album Voices wholesale with Medulla.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOWG03-xnXU

>>75192336
>Because you seemed to be very sure, and I'm wondering how.
All of Grimes' pop-oriented songs are in 4/4 as an artistic choice (see 1:10 onward of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmTUORMb0Eo ) and you can clearly see her bobbing to the beat in performances like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPSundvkYgE
You can also instinctually track the downbeat of each measure in most well-written music by ear with a practice. You just have to listen for when sounds tend to combine periodically.

>>75192849
see
>>75193041
Your excerpt there is too simplistic to warrant having separate measures.