Rate What the Person Above You is Listening To

[Helvete]

meh. it's good mainstream for mainstream

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz3EZipUKKY

EDIT: didn't see your post base groove. Nor can I see a link from you either XD

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

@Base groove: 8/10. Downloaded.

@Helvete

Your mainstream isn't my mainstream.

8/10 also. The second half was better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8ja0bPdB_U

 

[Base groove]

@helvete

Fixed. Sorry was preoccupied. It's worth checking out!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vR4omp4Zexo

 

[Helvete]

1/10.

Definitely not my style. Too whiny, and even though it sounds all cha[IDROITE][/IDROITE]otic it still manages to just feel weak and soulless. Like Nickelback had a baby with a bad garage band.

And you didn't rate the song I posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkKRU1ajKFA

Hmm I have to disagree, did you listen to it all?

Also, I don't understand the rating system; why put a cap on how good music can be? it doesn't work like that. So I won't rate it like that :P

@THD Weird was pretty good, may go back for another listen at some point.

@base groove, was alright, a little bland but fairly solid overall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM5OkRDik9I

 

[Base groove]

^meh, talk about bland ... I am not a fan of 8 bar intros,

How about some Deadbolt???

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dexk69DWzUg&list=PLAvYs5NG3f_x0Z7ZbIAmCBvyXB7AJAPb6&feature=plpp

 

[Helvete]

like the narration, more interesting than just singing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g50KfPlYZVI

 

[redbaron]

That...was fucking cool.

9.5/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBEUTntgMOI

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

I don't like them, low innovation, high violence, average metal. 5.5/10

huun huur tu

 

[Steven Gerrard]

This is mongolian throat singing right?

kindoff dig 6.6/10.

Actually this is good 8.7/10. One day I would like to have an isolated warehouse full of the instruements they are using- put them through bass amps and PA and see how they sound saturated in feedback and vibrating. Maybe some wah- some distortion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoRA1PUzzcE

I'd like to somehow sing like these people play.

The sense of melody in this is so distinctively irish. I love it.

Makes me want to walk through hills. I think I'll go do that.

 

[redbaron]

6.5/10.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag43uW4AOFc

 

[Puffy]

Ha, I suspect you like this band somewhat.

Hmm, 4.5/10. Would probably rate higher if I was drinking.

Listen to as much as you want, doubt it's for everyone:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aoe1Wz5g9Nc

 

[redbaron]

The most delightfully irritating song I've ever heard. It actually reminds me of...King Crimson?

9.3/10.

As for Regurgitator, I find them a little boring now that I'm older. It's more the nostalgia factor - they were my musical heroes from the ages of 7-12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1R5ELgJPGw

 

[Solitaire U.]

Nice stuff, nice picture of my dream house. 8/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwK1EpQtTUo

 

[Puffy]

Great film! Didn't they do the score to some Argento films (Suspiria?) as well? 7/10.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETfiUYij5UE

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

It's alright, interesting mix of ideas. 6.(665)/10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_25mVjKwcc

 

[Brontosaurie]

6.665 is 7 when rounded to integer bro. basic.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

6.665 is 7 when rounded to integer bro. basic.

I meant 6,(665) with 665 in period, so it is rather 6.665665665665...there is no roundness to it, blunt infinity.

 

[Brontosaurie]

that makes no difference but ok joke so hahahaha

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

that makes no difference but ok joke so hahahaha

Isn't 6.6/10 different from 7/10? I definitely wanted to capture something else than 7 here, as I find rounded 7 inappropriate in this situation. I don't know but of all people on this forum I thought you would understand that there is a difference.

My bad if I didn't get the joke.

I put it just so you know man, no drama yet. We can take it to the arena if you wish.

 

[Brontosaurie]

no sry i am stupid and misunderstood your initial post nvm

(somehow i saw the decimals as an add-on of optional content rather than a periodicity, which spawned reciprocal misinterpretation. sorry to steal yer time)

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

no sry i am stupid and misunderstood your initial post nvm

(somehow i saw the decimals as an add-on of optional content rather than a periodicity, which spawned reciprocal misinterpretation. sorry to steal yer time)

No I find it funny that we both managed to waste some time. Made me smile.
While demolishing this thread .

 

[Solitaire U.]

Great score. 8/10.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-sYFirfywY

 

[kenshi]

Kanno Yoko ga suki desu. 10/10

While we're on a Japan theme...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuxfQjJ-3DM

 

[Solitaire U.]

It's ok, wouldn't want to listen to it all day (10:08 seemed like all day ) 5/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLArCnqH8KA

 

[BigApplePi]

Blue Monday

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2x9mfgUsIis

 

[Cherry Cola]

7/10, not quite my genre which brings it down but it was good anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYfrhnu-ATY

 

[Brontosaurie]

oh the cohen. he should write a book. maybe he did. anyway it's clear he doesn't care how he sounds.

well it's ok i guess. there's some kinda mind to it. 5/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqK83YeORzc

 

[Cherry Cola]

yes he does you fucking cunt, also he wrote several books, you just dont know how to appreciate his sublime monadic singularly discretely dinstinct essence

 

[Brontosaurie]

he doesn't care about sound though. why do music then?

 

[Cherry Cola]

Yes he does, you misinterpret his minimalism for lack of care.

 

[Brontosaurie]

trust me, it's not the minimalism. i enjoy way more minimalistic stuff than cohen.

it's his extremely ear-straining flat chanting voice - which he typically refuses to modulate whatsoever opting to rely entirely on the impact of his patriarchal timbre - and his flat chanting melodies, and his stiff guitar accompaniments.

you can do a lot with minimal means. cohen has no means, just minimal. he has neat poems and bog-standard tunes performed with shaky pitch control. very lazy, and not in the crippled-by-self-criticism way, neither in the efficiency way.

some production made him alright on that lush 80's stuff, otherwise he's boring.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Well that he would not care about the sound of his music must certainly be a conclusion sprung from some sort of misunderstanding, this is the man who would refuse to play live when the sound technicians weren't doing their job good enough.

 

[Brontosaurie]

that's vanity, not craftsmanship.

he never did his own job good enough.

 

[Cherry Cola]

caring about anything of ones own can be called vanity, music is fucking vanity and so is health

 

[Brontosaurie]

you're making this way too simple.

it's not vanity because he cares about his creative output. it's vanity because his output is about capturing his magical persona in perfect fidelity, rather than exploring the possibilities of sound. if he was about music, he would have trusted his musical ability and made the most of the circumstances. copping out isn't a sign of strength.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Now you're ad-homing Leonard Cohen and simultaenously putting an arbitrary limit on what entails music just to keep it in line with the horizon of what you can fathom on an aesthetic level.

 

[BigApplePi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otJY2HvW3Bw

Suzanne takes you down to her place near the river
You can hear the boats go by
You can spend the night beside her
And you know that she's half crazy
But that's why you want to be there
And she feeds you tea and oranges
That come all the way from China
And just when you mean to tell her
That you have no love to give her
Then she gets you on her wavelength
And she lets the river answer
That you've always been her lover
And you want to travel with her
And you want to travel blind
And you know that she will trust you
For you've touched her perfect body with your mind.
And Jesus was a sailor
When he walked upon the water
And he spent a long time watching
From his lonely wooden tower
And when he knew for certain
Only drowning men could see him
He said "All men will be sailors then
Until the sea shall free them"
But he himself was broken
Long before the sky would open
Forsaken, almost human
He sank beneath your wisdom like a stone
And you want to travel with him
And you want to travel blind
And you think maybe you'll trust him
For he's touched your perfect body with his mind.

Now Suzanne takes your hand
And she leads you to the river
She is wearing rags and feathers
From Salvation Army counters
And the sun pours down like honey
On our lady of the harbour
And she shows you where to look
Among the garbage and the flowers
There are heroes in the seaweed
There are children in the morning
They are leaning out for love
And they will lean that way forever
While Suzanne holds the mirror
And you want to travel with her
And you want to travel blind
And you know that you can trust her
For she's touched your perfect body with her mind.

 

[Hawkeye]

That song was one of the first I learnt on the guitar when having lessons. To be honest, this is also the first time I've actually heard it. Nice use of the mellotron (I love saying mellotron).

I'll give it 7/10 simply because I learnt a particular guitar technique with it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZxFNXVQ1W8

 

[Brontosaurie]

Now you're ad-homing Leonard Cohen and simultaenously putting an arbitrary limit on what entails music just to keep it in line with the horizon of what you can fathom on an aesthetic level.

if that was an ad hom, you already ad hom'd him yourself. see 'his distinct essence blabla' etc. and you're the one who brought his copping out to the table.

i dare say my cohen rebuttal is way better than your standard musical rebuttals, which furthermore are broad and sweeping referring often to entire genres, as well as populistic and prejudiced showing abscence of any sincere attempts at comprehension. i might now anticipate some sort of "but it's not the same because my Ni gives me direct access to truth" baloney from you.

kudos on the rhetoric with nice MST kinda words 'fathom', 'aesthetic' and 'horizon'. they're not gonna help you make any real sense however.

the limit isn't arbitrary. your defense undermines all musical criticism tho, rendering this whole deal kinda pointless cause you could say the exact same stuff about john cage 4'33 or justin bieber or whatever.

i'm presenting arguments while you're just saying how good he is because he's cool.

you can't say varying his vocals and introducing something like groove (as he or his collaborators did in a spare couple of tracks) would detract from the music. and if you're gonna say that then we're back to the question of why he releases songs instead of poems. it's like a programmer releasing his code on printed paper pretending to be a prose writer.

i concede that "closing time", "hallelujah" and "avalanche" are worthy songs. the rest are uninspired run-on-the-mill sketches in comparison.

 

[Brontosaurie]

BAP: did you read the topic title lol?

 

[Cherry Cola]

No, you just aren't capable of appreciating Cohen which is fine, but that does not mean that Cohen does not care about the way his music sounds, such a notion is just absurd. Perhaps he doesn't in some sort of way which you think he and all other musicians should but that's another thing. I'm not really the only one who's sweeping and categorical in his judgements about what music should be here.

I'm not presenting arguments, but neither are you lol. Dismis

 

[Brontosaurie]

are you incapable of appreciating justin bieber or are you above it? the artistic appeal of cohen isn't nearly as complex as you like to think. but if you're willing to admit that all your dislikes, similarly to what you propose for mine in this case, are due to your own shortcomings and that your judgment is entirely deficient and unreliable, this discussion is over. otherwise we've got a peculiar discrepancy at hand.

as previously mentioned he might care about transmitting his grave somber chanting voice. but that's a static quality, a single point quickly made and thereafter just restated over and over. it's like saying someone cares about music cause he-she-it's nostalgic about a particular drumbeat or eager to cram as many time signature changes and scales as possible into their tunes. and the way his melodies might be anything but placeholder is through some dry historical reference which, again, is better suited to literature. or theatre.

yes i've made arguments. what you've said boils down to a mere denial, though.

 

[Hawkeye]

Stop arguing about subjective tastes. Muppets...

Complexity has nothing to do with good music.

 

[Brontosaurie]

haha good one. everything is subjective. taste can be refined and optimized. discussions like this are important.

i tend to agree about complexity, if we're using the colloquial definition (more on that below). cc apparently thinks cohen's work is too complex or advanced or smart for me and probably many others, on the other hand. but i understand that you're bound to ascribe that opinion to me because 1. i actually put the word there instead of dancing around it and 2. you like cohen and are trying to help cc defeat me albeit subversively and perhaps subconsciously, so you won't bother finding any invalid assumptions in his posts.

there are many ways to look at complexity. a common and quite fallacious one is: having many components. another one is: being difficult to understand. a sounder information-theoretical one is more about elegancy and efficiency, very relevant to music. it's about achieving rich results through simple means, like DNA for example. cc thinks cohen excels at this. i think he fails. i was using a mix of the two latter definitions in my previous post.

 

[Hawkeye]

Now you're being pedantic.

I don't like Cohen either. You didn't read my rating did you...


I also said you're both muppets. ^^

 

[Brontosaurie]

pedantic how?

well 7/10 is a like to me. but whatever, it was fun imagining conspiracy either way.

yup you sure did.

 

[Cherry Cola]

are you incapable of appreciating justin bieber or are you above it? the artistic appeal of cohen isn't nearly as complex as you like to think. but if you're willing to admit that all your dislikes, similarly to what you propose for mine in this case, are due to your own shortcomings and that your judgment is entirely deficient and unreliable, this discussion is over. otherwise we've got a peculiar discrepancy at hand.

as previously mentioned he might care about transmitting his grave somber chanting voice. but that's a static quality, a single point quickly made and thereafter just restated over and over. it's like saying someone cares about music cause he-she-it's nostalgic about a particular drumbeat or eager to cram as many time signature changes and scales as possible into their tunes. and the way his melodies might be anything but placeholder is through some dry historical reference which, again, is better suited to literature. or theatre.

yes i've made arguments. what you've said boils down to a mere denial, though.

False dichotomy, and chill out. No I'm willing admit that because differences are not shortcomings.

Your case could be made about any musician, Marc Bolan is just repeating the same single point, chanting like a mad grown up peter pan refusing to face the world. It's like saying someone cares about music cause he-she-its just "insert formal characteristic" etc etc

I disagree and I find the whole matter pointless to discuss in this manner and context.

Cohen can be good, and still not be your cup of tea, and it doesn't have to do with your level of intelligence whatsoever. The same case holds for music which you like which I can't appreciate. That if anything, is going beyond mere subjectivity.

 

[BigApplePi]

How rate rating?

Tell me how to rate what the person above me is listening to? Tell me if they are using threaded or linear mode? How do I tell which is above me if I don't know?

Tell me how to make a linear rating, say 7/10, when there are factors such as:

1. simple tune
2. complex tune
3. song in its own right with perfect integrity
4. song evoking associations of memory
5. song evoking associations of current fashion
6. song compared to similar song, non-original but embellished
7. tune from earlier generation
7b. tune I love you hate
7c. tune I hate you love
8. use my standard even if it is higher/lower than yours
9. "Happy Birthday" <-- how is that tune rated when it could be the most popular tune in the western world? 0/10 for unoriginality and dullness or 10/10 for popular choice or 10/10 for having an emotional story line that makes it a popular choice?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN8oLGBNXpE

 

[Hawkeye]

The rating is entirely subjective. There is no real right or wrong answer. You don't even have to like the song to give it a high rating. The song could trigger something else that makes you feel good.

Over analysis will ruin this thread.

Also, why would anyone use threaded mode in a thread where linearity plays an important role to posting?

 

[Brontosaurie]

False dichotomy, and chill out. No I'm willing admit that because differences are not shortcomings.

Your case could be made about any musician, Marc Bolan is just repeating the same single point, chanting like a mad grown up peter pan refusing to face the world. It's like saying someone cares about music cause he-she-its just "insert formal characteristic" etc etc

I disagree and I find the whole matter pointless to discuss in this manner and context.

Cohen can be good, and still not be your cup of tea, and it doesn't have to do with your level of intelligence whatsoever. The same case holds for music which you like which I can't appreciate. That if anything, is going beyond mere subjectivity.

which is this false dichotomy? am i gonna take "chill out" from someone who 1. started the allegedly pointless discussion by 2. calling me a fucking cunt? no.

how nice of you to admit that. your entire history of opinions disagrees but how nice of you.

marc bolan invented a new style of melody on practically every song of his first four albums. cohen on the other hand pretty much goes from the fifth to the sixth and back, all the time. he's also unable to hit the notes and this diffusion adds no value to his output. it may be an artistic choice, but a poor one at that. furthermore, bolan's singing is intrinsically more dynamic just considering the tonality and timbre, and lyrically he pays attention to the effect of pronounciation and implied prosody rather than exclusively relying on whatever static quality he also has, like cohen does. i'd also argue that this static quality in itself is more interesting and world-relevant in bolan's case but that's kinda beside the point. don't go all nihilism-relativism-skepticism on me. you wouldn't appreciate that yourself.

why did you initiate the discussion then?

that's blatantly incongruent with what you previously said and implied in this discussion and about art you dislike in general. don't pretend otherwise.