/mu/ - Music (Temp full images)

>MBDTF

>3

gr8 b8 m8 no deb8 i r8 8/8

>>48535094
>Mushroomhead
why is this /mu/core? what did i miss?

>>48535122
I'll pretend like I rated MBDTF a 3 for baiting purposes simply because the responce made me lel a bit

>>48535142
Top tip: if you see the /mu/ essentials posted and there's a random album that you don't know in the mix, that means that the poster really wants you to listen to that album. They just don't want to say it outright, because they're shy about their taste or something.

>>48535142
I've wondered why it's on the /mu/ essentials picture

>>48535094
>2 hour snoozefest
>god-tier

adjoined glandah

>>48535174
>Calling it a snoozefest

>>48535094
>ITAOTS
8.5
>MPP
8.0
>Kid A
muthafuckin' 10.
>what the fuck is mushroom head
ya weirdo
>Loveless
8.0
>OK Computer
6.0
>ITCOTCK
9.0. Also, wtf? Only a 6 while OKC is a 8.0?
>LYSF
8.5.
>MBDTF
7.5.
>TMS
8.5.

>>48535094
OP what the fuck is this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21TYHb_MEuY

>>48535227
I rated these on how I enjoyed listening to them, and for me ITCOTCK was only a 6, although I do recognize the fantastic qualites of the album.

>>48535094
>ITAOTS
7
>MPP
6
>Kid A
9
>mushroom head
never fucking heard of it
>Loveless
7
>OK Computer
8
>ITCOTCK
9
>LYSF
8
>MBDTF
8
>TMS
9

>>48535094
Whats the template for these

How do you make them, in photoshop?

>>48535312
I based the essentials off of this photo. I think all of the albums on this are pretty accurate to vast discussion, but I've barely seen Mushroomhead Talks.

>>48535349
Here ya go (I assume you mean these heads)

>>48535358
No seriously guys, when did we put Mushroomhead on there!? In three years I've never seen them mentioned once here. Am I being punk'd?

>ITAOTS
8/10
>MPP
6/10
>Kid A
7/10
>Mushroom head
really now
>Loveless
6/10
>OK Computer
7/10
>ITCOTCK
6/10
>LYSF
5/10
>MBDTF
7/10
>TMS
5/10

>>48535349
In terms of making them, I just pasted the album covers into a blank canvas on a paint program, then pasted in one of these ratings under the respective album.

>>48535395
I don't know it's kind of the out of place album on the essentials list

>>48535094
ITAOTS: 6/10
MPP: 5/10
Kid A: 7/10
Loveless: 8/10
OkC: 6/10
ITCOTKC: 9/10
LYSFLATH: 9/10
MBDTF: 4/10
Money Store: 4/10

>>48535094
ITAOTS - 9
MPP - 8
Kid A - 7
Mushroomhead - ???
Loveless - 9
OKC - 6
ITCOTCK - 6
LYSF - 8
MBDTF - 7
The Money Store - 7

>>48535358
Yeah Hospice should be there

I think we're being rused

It seems like all of you guys are confused by the Mushroomhead thing. I must've saved an image where someone tried to market them by putting it on the /mu/ essentials list or something

>>48535502
Not trying to ruise you, just the version of this photo I have

>ITAOTS
9
>MPP
5.5
>Kid A
6.5
>Hospice
10
>Loveless
6
>OK Computer
6.5
>ITCOTCK
8
>LYSF
7.5
>MBDTF
5.5
>TMS
3

>>48535288
This is the point on the Slipknot flow chart where it would say, "I like this, but can it be shittier?"

>>48535167
>>48535142
Essential butt-rock you fucking plegs

>>48535094
>ITAOTS
10
>MPP
9
>Kid A
8.5
>Mushroomhead
0
>Loveless
10
>OKC
8
>ITCOTCK
7.5
>LYSF
8.5
>MBDTF
8
>TMS
10
>Hospice
7

>>48535422
tried to make one for the microphones...thanks man

>>48535094
OP here, did a search for the /mu/ essentials chart, and it's supposed to be Hospice in the place of Mushroomhead. I don't know why the version I found had Mushroomhead there. They're just an Industrial Metal group.

>>48535094
>>48535167
>>48535358
can this piece of shit be replaced by Wish You Were Here or something?!

>>48535615
It's meant to be Hospice, I found an innacurate version

>>48535615
>MBDTF above ITCOTCK
pls explain

>ITAOTS
7/10
>MPP
9/10
>Kid A
8/10
>Mushroom head
idk what this is
>Loveless
never listened to it
>OK Computer
never listened to it
>ITCOTCK
never listened to it
>LYSF
never listened to it
>MBDTF
never listened to it
>TMS
9/10

why did i do this

>>48535094
ITAOS: 9,5
MPP: 7
Kid A: 8,5
Loveless: 9
OKC: 6
ICOTCK: 7,5
LYSFLATH: 8
MBDTF: 9
Money Store: 9,5

>>48535094
Accurate chart

>>48535094
OP accurate ratings, hopefully this will stop the most likely viral marketing of Mushroomhead confusion

>>48535696
>>Loveless
>never listened to it
>>OK Computer
>never listened to it
>>ITCOTCK
>never listened to it
>>LYSF
>never listened to it
>>MBDTF
>never listened to it
are you new here or slow? damn son, go listen to all of these, you're in for a treat, they're all great. don't listen to mushroom head i don't know why the fuck that was put here, was probably supposed to be trout mask replica or hospice.

>>48535674
Yeez'
Both are great, but what Kanye does in MBDTF is beyond the genre he is in, he just takes hip hop production to an unseen level and adds in this sort of twisted persona that he has of a guy completely crazy of himself.

I mean you can say fuck it, this guy just says meaningless things, that's not great lyricism. I agree, but its the character that says these lyrics and made them that give them meaning, he's so fucked up from fame and acclaim, his mom dying and his public life fucking up.

The production just matches that completely, blown out of proportion. So big and rich, everyone on this album is a perfect fit and at their best. It is just a great album and in the end its up to taste.

Expanded version

>>48535227
>OKC rated the lowest
>lower than anco and even memerap

i shig and i dig

>>48535094
the only /mu/core 10s are obviously loveless and kid a.

ITCOTCK would be 10 without moonchild

>>48535812
nah, I think I've been here about 3 years now. I've just never gotten behind the whole methodical approach to listening to music a la the /mu/ essentials chart. If an album naturally peaks my interest for one reason or another, I listen to it, but that's pretty much it. I've only just listened to ITAOS this year for interest, only because my friend offered me a free ticket to see them in Chicago.

>ITAOTS
8/10
>MPP
6/10
>Kid A
8/10
>Loveless
8/10
>OKC
7.5/10
>ITCOTCK
9/10
>Fists
7/10
>MBDTF
6/10
>TMS
6.5/10

>>48535897
this is shit

>>48535898
OK Computer is bland, mediocre Pop Rock.

MPP is a great blend of accesible pop and psychedelia while MBDTF still raises the bar for Rap.

The fact that people would rate TMS over 3 proves that people listen to music that is intentionally bad and delude themselves into believe that it is good to fuel a superiority complex over normal people.

Honestly, now that Death Grips is out of the picture I think I might hire a kid with severe autism and aspergers and let him yell random shit over a hip hop/dubstep beat.

Anyone want in? I'll start a project for it on a crowdfunding site. I'll need money to pay the kid more than Publix is paying him.

>>48535537

>>48536016
ITT: Plebs can't into owls

>ITAOTS
8
>MPP
7.5
>Kid A
7.5
>OKC
8
>Loveless
9
>ITCOCK
8
>LYSF
7.5
>MBDTF
6
>Money Store
6

>ITAOTS
8/10
>MPP
7/10
>Kid A
5/10
>Loveless
7/10
>OKC
6.5/10
>ITCOTCK
6/10
>Fists
8/10
>MBDTF
9/10
>TMS
7/10

>>48536032

MPP has three good tracks on it and the rest is meandering, pointless bullshit.

>>48536116

>>48536128
That's simply not true.

Even so, the complexity of the instrumentals alone put it above OK Computer.

>>48536032
>bland, mediocre pop rock

well in this case so is ITAOTS lel

>>48535288
Holy shit, THIS is Mushroomhead? Now I fucking understand why this is on the essentials, shit fucking goes hard.

>ITAOTS
5/10
>MPP
5/10
>Kid A
7/10
>Hospice
3/10
>Loveless
7/10
>OKC
6/10
>ITCOTCK
8/10
>LYSF
8/10
>MBDTF
3/10
>TMS
2/10

>>48536170
>complex
>good

>>48536172
You are correct!
However, ITAOTS incorporates a wide variety of instruments and styles.

>>48535626
comment on my paint u fucking faggots %

>>48536170

Something tells me you're not a musician and you have no idea what you're talking about.

>>48536170
>string arrangements by Jonny
>not being more complex than anything AnCo ever did

>>48536170
i love MBDTF but you have no idea what you're talking about, and it's very very obvious you don't play an instrument.

>>48536209
First of all, you're just nitpicking now.

Second, complexity is good because, though MPP is considered a poppy release, AnCo managed to bring it above simple melodies and give it some real artistic integrity.
>>48536229
Huh, I wonder what I should do when I head back to study music in the Fall then.
If you put OK Computer above MPP I'd say the same to you.

>>48536251
>MBDTF
fuck i'm too tired for this shit
MPP*
not my beautiful dark twisted fantasy
merriweather post pavilion

>>48536212
so you're judging based off of the amount of instruments used and not worrying about whether the record is actually a competent work?

>>48536249
I don't remember anything complex in OK Computer.
>>48536286
see >>48536255

>>48536290
No, of course not. But an expanded, more colorful instrumentation leads to better music.

>>48535094
Rating Guy is back, bitches.

>ITAOTS
10/10 (God Tier)
>MPP
5/10
>Kid A
10/10 (God Tier)
>Mushroomhead
haven't heard/10
>Loveless
9/10
>OK Computer
8/10
>ITCOTCK
9/10
>LYSFLATH
9/10
>MBDTF
6/10
>TMS
9/10

>>48535094
>Itaots
6/10
>mpp
2/10
>kid a
3/10
>mushroomhead
4/10
>loveless
3/10
>okc
1/10
>itcock
5/10
>lysf
2/10
>mbdtf
6/10
>get got
>7/10

ITAOTS: 4.5
MPP: 3
Kid A: 4
Loveless: 5
OKC: 3.5
ICOTCK: 3
LYSFLATH: 3
MBDTF: 4.5
Money Store: 5

>>48536313
your ratings are really inflated dude

>>48536313
nobody knows or cares who you are, bitches.

>>48536170
>Even so, the complexity of the instrumentals alone put it above OK Computer.

Climbing up the walls shits on anything on that album.

put down that blunt

>>48536159
you're a jew?

>>48536359
I was just posting a few threads ago about how using drugs while listening to music is degenerate so i can't help you there.

>>48536312
>I don't remember anything complex in OK Computer.
http://youtu.be/qbtZyuOMdHI

>>48535453
>>48535395
holy shit why are you people so stupid

the op obviously put it on there because he likes the band. people add in weird choices to the chart all the time. last year it was with love by zomby and this year it was benji

Holy shit I actually really enjoy Mushroomhead (though not that album in particular, 4/10 maybe 5 to a fan) and this had me laffin so bad
that was sum good stuff

>>48536313
agreed with everything if loveless and ITAOTS were swapped

>>48535534
hospice by the antlers was removed and that was replaced with it
i don't know why

>>48536412
I really don't see anything complex about that. Even In the Flowers is more complex.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY8WH8qgBLM

>>48536344
>>48536318

>>48536489
>>>48536344 (You)
My ratings were /5,

>>48536488
you gotta be fucking kidding me.some beach boys-tier pop layered with noise is more complicated than string arrangements, O'Brien guitar sounds and Jonny's Space Echo filter.

>ITAOTS
7/10

>MPP
2/10

>Kid A
6/10

>Loveless
7/10

>ITCOTCK
8/10

>LYSF
6/10

>MDBF
Never listened

>TMS
10/10

>STFTB (implying this isn't /mu/core)
8/10

>>48536551
see>>48536489

ITAOTS
9
>MPP
7.5
>Kid A
9
>what the fuck is mushroom head
ya weirdox2
>Loveless
8.5
>OK Computer
10
>ITCOTCK
8.5
>LYSF
9.5
>MBDTF
9.5
>TMS
10

Wish it didn't look like I'm a drone but I've gone through periods of reverence for most of these albums over time, anyone else like this?

>>48536596
Did you miss all of the key changes going on in the guitar line of In The Flowers? I don't mean complexity in terms of quantity but quality.
Rachmaninoff wrote for orchestras simplistic pieces that were easily surpassed by even Beethoven's String Quartets.

>>48535722
>300x300

>>48536698
>key changes
that doesn't mean absolutely anything.

Lift Your Skinny Fists is hardly the best GY!BE album.

New Zero > F#A# > Allelujah! > Skinny Fists > Yanqui

LYSFLATH has too much shitty fucking samples

>>48535762
>ITAOTS
9
>MPP
7.5
>Kid A
10
>Hospice
10
>Loveless
8.5
>OKC
9.5
>ITCOTKC
6
>LYSF
8
MBDTF
3
TMS
3

>>48536773
>too much shitty fucking samples
sounds to me like someone wishes he could sleep on the beach

>>48536255

Nigga, are you for real? OK Computer utilises changes in metre and rhythm that put anything on MPP to shame. Not to mention that Greenwood's string arrangements are actually good from not only a classical theory standpoint, but from a modern theory standpoint - they are borderline atonal and literally stunning. To go on, everyone in Radiohead is actually an above average musician at best - Yorke had actual vocal training from a young age, unlike any of the members of Animal Collective. To say that MPP is somehow more musically intricate and challenging is literally wrong. It's not a matter of opinion, you are just literally wrong. There's a reason OK Computer is considered by some to be almost a prog album, and MPP is not.

>>48536762
It's inherently more complex music.
It's a helluva lot easier to make one song entirely in e minor (Climbing up the Walls) rather than a song that, in the first 1:30 minutes, transitions from F Major, to b minor, to C Major to D Major...etc. And I'm missing some keys I'm pretty sure.
Perhaps I should have clarified that it's more complex musically rather than instrumentally. Even so I find the instrumentals in MPP to be more colorful, more alluring, and overall just more interesting than Climbing Up The Walls.

>>48535174
its just having patience, eh

>>48536881
I sure as hell hope you aren't saying that the strings in >>48536412 are dissonant.
More and more every day, I can see what Scaruffi meant by "Faux-Avant Garde" when discussing OK Computer...not through listening to the album, but through hearing fans talk about it.

>>48535094
ITAOTS - 9
MPP - 8.5
Loveless - 10
OK Computer - 4
LYSFLATH - 8
MBDTF - 9
TMS - 7.5

>>48536488
you clearly have no idea what you're talking about, it's kinda cute

>>48536892

Key changes literally mean nothing in this case because Animal Collective probably had no fucking clue what they were doing. By that logic, you could try to argue that a 10-year-old playing "Smoke on the Water" on an acoustic guitar is more complex because of the atypical rhythmic staggering that comes as a result of him not knowing how to properly play a guitar. Many contemporary pop musicians utilise key changes without knowing in the slightest what they're doing.

>>48536973
I assure you I know full well what I am talking about.
>>48536981
No, because the rhythmic stutterings of a 10 year old are not an artistic choice.
Who cares if they didn't think where the pivot chord would be to lead into every arpeggiation? They included it and the music is more complex as a result.

>>48536953

And yet you've got no evidence to the contrary, besides championing "muh key changes xD". I would say I'm sorry for you for posting such a blatantly false statement, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't like to see you get ripped to shreds for being a self-absorbed know-it-all prick who probably took a quarter of choir at community college and thinks he knows fucking everything.

>>48536981
>>48536892
>>48537050
itt: arguing over pointless shit

>>48537093
>>48536953
wouldn't it be cool if everyone like, got along and were nice people instead of being jerks to one another?

holy shit this board sometimes.

>>48537093
Ad hominems too! False ones, at that!
You didn't even address my point that the music is more complex.
>>48537098
I don't want to have to argue with le 90's kids about their pop rock. I said Kid A was a fucking 10/10. If it asked about their albums after Kid A, I would have rated them all nearby Kid A. But OK Computer (and the Bends for that matter) are pop rock.

Sigh.

>>48537159
I KNOW. I try to have good discussions but people here aren't worth arguing with a lot of the time.

>>48537159
for real. these two are just bitching at each other and everyone else reading the thread is like the kid playing video games pretending not to hear the arguing from the kitchen
you're better than that, /mu/

>>48535094
judge me

>>48537224
I don't enjoy doing it, but when people challenge my opinions I try to defend them. The problem is that, here, people don't want an argument. They just want to say you're wrong in the most vehement ways possible.
>>48537234
I disagree on OKC and Kid A's ratings but you know what, whatever.

>>48537275
what would you have Kid A's and OKC?

>>48537275

your opinions are pretty fucking stupid

>>48537305
oh boy...

I'll just say that Kid A incorporates a variety of different styles and is overall a more complex record than OKC. But again, whatever.
>>48537316
I haven't had anyone prove that point yet.

>>48537343

It's pretty obvious by how militant you are about shying away from "pop" music unless you find some other way to inject "artistic integrity" into the mix

Pop is not a dirty word.

>>48537234
some of your numbers don't match the words you used to describe your opinions

i consider "pretty good" to be a 7 and "ok" to be a 6

>>48537316
>being rude
>>>/b/

>>48537343
I just enjoy OKC more even though i feel like Kid A is objectively better.

>>48537386
>Pop is not a dirty word.
I respectfully disagree

>>48537234
inflated as hell but not bad

>>48537386
It isn't, but it often is diluted music that rests in the background save for choruses.
MPP is Pop music. However, it is very well-written, artistically valid Pop music. Some people consider Sufjan Stevens' Age of Adz to be Pop (I guess Baroque Pop, as poor a term that is) and I would agree that it is high quality Pop.
>>48537433
OK! Thank you for not saying "your opinions are pretty fucking stupid." There's hope yet for /mu/.

>>48537416
i go by how you would grade a paper
a 7=70% which is a c which is okay.
a 6 would be a d which is bad.

>>48537441
whats inflated?

>>48537482
like >>48537416 said, your ratings are all way higher than they look like they should be

>>48537450
that...doesn't make any sense dude, if you're going to do that just use letter grades.

besides, the grading scale in most of the US is fucked up

>>48537446
>it often is diluted music that rests in the background save for choruses.
what the fuck does that mean? every genre has more than its fair share of boring derivative garbage.

>>48537557
I suppose, but those artists are not typically the identifiers and symbols of their genres. The symbols and identifiers for Pop are Katy Perry, Taylor Swift, Sara Bareilles, etc. Artists that certainly look pretty, but focus all of their music around choruses and simplistic harmonies.

>>48537600
>I suppose, but those artists are not typically the identifiers and symbols of their genres.
at that point it becomes a matter of opinion.

>>48537600
>The symbols and identifiers for Pop are Katy Perry, Taylor Swift, Sara Bareilles, etc.
are you talking about commercial pop? the top 40 shit? then yes, i agree with you.

the thing about pop is that it's not really a genre, it's a pretty broad umbrella. i don't think of the artists you listed when i think of "pop", i think of anything that has a poppy structure (verse-chorus) or instrumentation. those things can be applied in a lot of different ways.

only correct answer

>>48537716
top kek

>>48537716
this guy gets it
MRH confirmed for /mu/ core
spread the word

>>48537716
I'm inclined to agree, but that's just my opinion and I could be wrong

>>48537716
objectively correct

>>48535892
muh production

Overrated Milky Hotel : 7/10

The Animals : 6/10

Kid : 9/10

Mushroomfags : 3/10

Valentine got her period : 5/0

Ok computer : Best fucking album 10/10

The Crimson King : 8/10

Push Your Hands Up! : 7/10

keanye??? : 4/10

Death DIcks : 4/10

go.... hate me for loving OC over KA

>>48538126
I don't hate you, but I'm curious why.

>all this MPP hate


my soul. It hurts.

>>48538126
>5/0
so its infinitely good?
5 divided by zero is infinity....

>>48538184
stay strong friend

>>48538197
no it's not

>>48538143
In my opinion is the best of Radiohead, also, the reason why i'm a musician right now

>>48538197

typo , my bad
and I prefer other shoegaze bands rather than MBV sorry :/

>>48535762
8
4
6.5
5
4
5
10
6.5
5
7.5

>>48536041
>The fact that

My dumbass friend says that lysf is not /mu/core. I disagreed. What do you guys think

>>48538364
That this isn't your blog.