Best Ever Albums

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

cestuneblague — Fri, 1 Apr 2016 23:00:04 GMT

Author: cestuneblague

Posted: 04/02/2016 03:00

Satie wrote:

going down the top of the 2010s chart here, the following are hot garbage indie folk and hot garbage indie folk-adjacent:

Arcade Fire
The National
Tame Impala
Bon Iver
Vampire Weekend
Fleet Foxes (FJM is somehow even worse, creating a unique nadir of music that deserves documentation as the absolute lowest stratigraphic threshold of artistic creation)
Sun Kil Moon
The Black Keys
Sufjan Stevens
Arctic Monkeys
The War on Drugs
The Tallest Man on Earth
Jack White

and that's not even to mention the disturbing trends of non-experimental experimental schlock, retro electropop, and plodding hip hop with no energy or sound design that round out the majority of the Top 50 here.

I dislike a good number of those bands and yet do really enjoy a couple, HOW CAN I BE EVALUATED AND VALIDATED AS A SO-CALLED MUSIC FAN!!!

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

cestuneblague — Fri, 1 Apr 2016 22:56:55 GMT

Author: cestuneblague

Posted: 04/02/2016 02:56

You know I always thought Satie was somebody's puppet account, but his meta-am-i-sarcastic-or-am-ironically-anti-sarcastic schtick basically felt like a see-through mask that actually revelead far more about the member underneath than I think was intended.

I donno, to be quite honest I see both Purism vs Tokenism in music often (though not all the time) as a form of insecurity, and for some reason I find tokenism more forgiving. I think if perhaps sometimes one may personally overrate a certain "token" favorite from a particular genre to make their overall taste seem a bit more expansive, I think that's not really hurting anything and if it actually leads them to look into a particular style of music they hitherto haven't heard that much than I think it actually accomplishes something worthwhile. Now Purism I just find kind of irksome, mainly cuz it both kills discussion and in many ways the creative genius and is often perpretated by those who claim to want to accomplish the exact opposite. BUt also cause it can breed that kind of Superiority Complex, the sort of know-it-all Expert On All Things who deems not only what music is worthy to be considered worthwhile towards a particular realm of music but also what personal music tastes are "good" or "bad", "authentic" or "brainwashed by the Pitchfork masses"- despite the fact that both music taste and what makes a particular work of art worthwhile is a completely abstract, subjective concept. When I see people picking on people's taste or decided whether a work is authentic or not, I just find that a form of bullying that's masking a certain insecurity about how they evaulate their own taste and the fruitless quest to find what is truly the "best" music out there (when it should be just about discussing and savoring what our personal favorites are). I donno this kind of goes beyond simple tokenism v purism so whatever 7.5 generally favorable reviews.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

Anonymous — Fri, 1 Apr 2016 21:55:46 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 04/02/2016 01:55

Perhaps a purism that disputes your right to adopt a label is less offensive than one that disputes your right to make music of your choosing. But then an artist seldom chooses their own labels, so where's the beef?

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

Anonymous — Fri, 1 Apr 2016 21:45:23 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 04/02/2016 01:45

meccalecca wrote:

baystateoftheart wrote:

"this isn't real country music!!1! 😠 What happened to true artists like Waylon Jennings and George Jones??!"

To be fair, country music has gone through really odd periods in which it sounded nothing like country, just looked the part.

baystateoftheart wrote:

Very true... I grew up in a fairly rural area, and it sometimes seemed that the ubiquitous love for country had more to do with the reinforcement of a rural white identity than an appreciation for a certain sound. With that in mind, perhaps country purists play a constructive role in encouraging a more meaningful and/or unified concept of country that has discernible musical characteristics, as opposed to it progressively becoming a catch-all term for things like twangy pop/easy listening/hip-hop.

The answer lies here: http://www.ameripolitan.com/about.html for the most part anyways.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

baystateoftheart — Fri, 1 Apr 2016 18:14:11 GMT

Author: baystateoftheart

Posted: 04/01/2016 22:14

meccalecca wrote:

baystateoftheart wrote:

I'd probably have more fun talking to 50 albums kid (the purist?) than Loveless kid (the tokenist?). But that's probably because I almost never listen to albums twice, a habit I'm trying to break.

One listen is almost never enough. Does that include records you liked the first time around? If I like something the first time through, I want to listen to it again almost immediately.

I completely agree that one listen is not enough! And no, my favorite records are ones that I go back to, albeit usually not immediately.

meccalecca wrote:

baystateoftheart wrote:

"this isn't real country music!!1! 😠 What happened to true artists like Waylon Jennings and George Jones??!"

To be fair, country music has gone through really odd periods in which it sounded nothing like country, just looked the part.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

meccalecca — Fri, 1 Apr 2016 15:49:46 GMT

Author: meccalecca

Posted: 04/01/2016 19:49

baystateoftheart wrote:

I'd probably have more fun talking to 50 albums kid (the purist?) than Loveless kid (the tokenist?). But that's probably because I almost never listen to albums twice, a habit I'm trying to break.

One listen is almost never enough. Does that include records you liked the first time around? If I like something the first time through, I want to listen to it again almost immediately.

baystateoftheart wrote:

"this isn't real country music!!1! 😠 What happened to true artists like Waylon Jennings and George Jones??!"

To be fair, country music has gone through really odd periods in which it sounded nothing like country, just looked the part.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

RoundTheBend — Fri, 1 Apr 2016 15:38:03 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 04/01/2016 19:38

baystateoftheart wrote:

Of all the manifestations of purism, the must frustrating to me are the pretty large groups who police genre barriers based on their own nostalgia, for instance: "this isn't real hip-hop!!1! 😠 What happened to true artists like Biggie and Tupac??!" and "this isn't real country music!!1! 😠 What happened to true artists like Waylon Jennings and George Jones??!"

I agree.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

baystateoftheart — Fri, 1 Apr 2016 11:24:26 GMT

Author: baystateoftheart

Posted: 04/01/2016 15:24

craola wrote:

I'm going to take this to extremes.

if one kid has listened to 50 shoegaze albums one time a piece and another kid has listened only to my bloody valentine's loveless, but has listened to it 50 times, i'm going to have a lot more fun talking with loveless kid.

I'd probably have more fun talking to 50 albums kid (the purist?) than Loveless kid (the tokenist?). But that's probably because I almost never listen to albums twice, a habit I'm trying to break.

Of all the manifestations of purism, the must frustrating to me are the pretty large groups who police genre barriers based on their own nostalgia, for instance: "this isn't real hip-hop!!1! 😠 What happened to true artists like Biggie and Tupac??!" and "this isn't real country music!!1! 😠 What happened to true artists like Waylon Jennings and George Jones??!"

19loveless91 wrote:

Allabaster = Best New User.

Outstanding avatar: Tap
Outstanding custom rank: dividesbyzero 🤣 🤣 🤣

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

Anti — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 23:23:06 GMT

Author: Anti

Posted: 04/01/2016 03:23

babyBlueSedan wrote:

I think we're forgetting how musical tastes develop and how long it can take for them to grow. I've been listening to music as a hobby for around five years and have changed the way I find music a number of times. At first I looked up songs I already knew on YouTube and found suggested videos or read about what people were talking about in the comments. Then I used Wikipedia to find a random list of 100 greatest 90s albums and built off of that list. Then I used Rolling Stone, discovered this site a year later, and now my music news is a combination of Stereogum and the current year charts from here and RYM. You can't just expect people to drastically change their habits or find these obscure things - I was a music fan for 4 years before I started reading any music site regularly. People move at their own pace because only they can know what they're ready to experience. And even if that growth is slow it happens. I used to only listen to rock. Now I listen to hip hop and pop and country and all sorts of things and largely dislike classic rock. People will find their niche, but you can't force them into it.

Also, not all of the users here are people who listen to music as a hobby. I spend a huge amount of my free time listening to music but others are just looking for new music to play in their car or while working out. And that's fine - we shouldn't expect them to react well to "all that music you're listening to is shit, listen to this instead" when they don't have an interest to expand. I've had this happen with video games - people assume that I'm a huge gamer because I like Zelda games. That's literally one of maybe 5 games I play and I don't have any interest in expanding, so don't try to get me to try all kinds of new things. Hobbies are for fun, and when you're being forced into expanding your horizons they stop being fun.

This is probably the unsung post of the thread.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

RoundTheBend — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 23:08:23 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 04/01/2016 03:08

Satie wrote:

just got back from Hijokaidan show and honestly if they arent your favorite band, i just feel bad for you at this point. i have no reason to continue on these forums when everyone here has a vested interest in pretending i'm somehow terrible for pointing out the blatantly obvious that those who rely on canon publications are missing a treasure trove previously unattainable. g'bye yall

I enjoyed having someone with a strong/different opinion on this forum. Like others have said, we agree with and even enjoy some of the things you say, but it's too bad a lot of it was talking down instead of seeking understanding and learning from one another.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

Tap — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 22:11:39 GMT

Author: Tap

Posted: 04/01/2016 02:11

Satie wrote:

what a load of horseshit. telling people that they are insincere in their enjoyment of music, simply concerned with keeping up with an unquestioned feeding from the tastemakers, not actually engaging with and genuinely being fulfilled by the music they enjoy, is the absolute worst way to accomplish this goal.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

19loveless91 — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 06:19:01 GMT

Author: 19loveless91

Posted: 03/31/2016 10:19

Satie wrote:

Lol you're seriously deluding yourself if you think that's what people's problem with you is. Here's a hint, if you think that people over here hate you, it's because you act like an insufferable dick to everyone who doesn't agree with you and actually dares to like the music you seem unworthy of your time.

You know, I tend to think you're on point with most of the things you've been saying over here (and in general in the forums), but that doesn't mean that the music, praised by mainstream publications is necessarily bad - I mean even you omitted some artists, e.g. Joanna Newsom from your list of "hot garbage indie folk" (also, why on earth you think all of those mentioned can be lumped into "folk" category is beyond me, but okay, that's besides the point) artists, and I doubt you'd think less of your favourites if they were suddenly featured on Stereogum or Pitchfork.

I'm not saying that the musicians that have the media machinery behind them, are somehow better than the more obscure musicians, and I'm as sad as anyone that most people will still only rely on those publications, instead of also looking for alternative sources, but to dismiss everything praised by the mainstream(ish) media (even if most of them seem to be playing it safe with what they praise) and lumping that music together in one trashcan, and all the while thinking you're a better person because your tastes don't align with them, is fucking absurd. Always easy to play the victim, isn't it? Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

P.S. Allabaster = Best New User.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

Anonymous — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 02:57:28 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 03/31/2016 06:57

Perhaps a vote, tokens vs pures. To whichever is the lesser evil goes the spoils!

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

Anonymous — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 02:30:44 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 03/31/2016 06:30

just got back from Hijokaidan show and honestly if they arent your favorite band, i just feel bad for you at this point. i have no reason to continue on these forums when everyone here has a vested interest in pretending i'm somehow terrible for pointing out the blatantly obvious that those who rely on canon publications are missing a treasure trove previously unattainable. g'bye yall

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

RoundTheBend — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 20:29:39 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 03/31/2016 00:29

craola wrote:

i'm going to take this to extremes.

if one kid has listened to 50 shoegaze albums one time a piece and another kid has listened only to my bloody valentine's loveless, but has listened to it 50 times, i'm going to have a lot more fun talking with loveless kid.

I like it.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

RoundTheBend — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 20:29:01 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 03/31/2016 00:29

Satie wrote:

nope, don't expect that at all it's been years of that not happening and i have no interest in feigning respect for people who spend forty-five seconds sampling a single record from a genre before dismissing it wholesale and pretending there's some dissonance on my end when i've spent hours with the music i lambaste. i also have been constantly dogged and repudiated as some kind of shut-in or person with too much time on his hands for having a genuine interest in music exploration, despite repeated presentations of evidence to the contrary, primarily that i have far too much on my plate to be the kind of NEET 10-hour-a-day listening robot people accuse me of being. my input is clearly not valued, as years of approaches ranging from excessive saccharine hugboxing to sardonic dismissal to aggressive repudiation have borne the same response: me having absolutely no niche on the forums. if it makes me a dick to be tired of this trend, so be it. i can make my personal byline "Voice of Reason" too to come off as more sagacious on matters of etiquette, taste, and rationality.

I had to look up half of these words :).

I think sometimes you have a sharp tongue and condescending tone and it doesn't matter what you are saying, that just rubs people the wrong way. In my case as well, instead of seeking understanding you just went for the jugular... sometimes you infer things that maybe the person didn't mean to begin with.

I think the forums are place for people to come together and learn from each other and that's when it is most enjoyable?

Also I think anyone on this site is considered a music lover... I mean who on earth would seek out such site and participate in the forums if they weren't (trolls excluded of course) truly interested in music? I kinda feel like people often dismiss someone for listening to all top 500 rolling stone albums like that's child's play/not a real music fan, whereas, I kinda feel like that's quite the feat, even if it is limited to records that aren't off the beaten path. Your average music listener would never do that.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

RoundTheBend — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 20:16:12 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 03/31/2016 00:16

SuedeSwede wrote:

your posts sound like messages on inspirational calendars and i love it

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

I think you were directing this to the post above... but regardless, I thought it was hysterical, and in a good way.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

craola — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 17:01:14 GMT

Author: craola

Posted: 03/30/2016 21:01

i'm going to take this to extremes.

if one kid has listened to 50 shoegaze albums one time a piece and another kid has listened only to my bloody valentine's loveless, but has listened to it 50 times, i'm going to have a lot more fun talking with loveless kid.

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

meccalecca — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:50:39 GMT

Author: meccalecca

Posted: 03/30/2016 20:50

dividesbyzero wrote:

They're both moronic standpoints but at least purism implies you have some kind of technical knowledge rather than just a self-assured arrogant ignorance. I'll take knowledgeable elitism over ignorant elitism I guess.

Haha

Re: Point of Discussion: Purism vs. Tokenism

Applerill — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:33:43 GMT

Author: Applerill

Posted: 03/30/2016 20:33

dividesbyzero wrote:

For what it's worth I think he makes a few good points underneath all unnecessary animosity, but at the same time I really don't think there's nearly as much attack on his taste or listening habits as he seems to think, at least not that I've noticed. I dunno. I don't really think this can go anywhere. Satie can never change BEA and BEA can never change Satie.

Actually, this is really well said, and probably reflects how I feel, too.

Anyway, on-topic: I discovered a Stanford paper that talked about this really well a month ago. Basically, it argues that you can still be a purist and be a cultural omnivore, and that it apparently makes you more cultured (or something). You can find it at http://web.stanford.edu/~amirgo/docs/boundaries.pdf.