It's a major grower. Instead of listening to the entire album, just listen to "Emily" a few times until you 'get' it. That's what I did and now I like the whole album. It all takes time though.

I've only listened to it about 3 times, so meh. Albums sometimes do need 10 or even 20 plays. I remember my first impressions of it being WTF IS THIS SH*T?

Not heard it in a while, mind.

better yet, listen to this till you get it.

I think albums only need 10 or 20 listens if you don't really know what you like. I used to find albums that took quite a few spins to get, but by now I've listened to so much I'm pretty confident about what I will like and not like. Now even if an albums is pretty out there, as long as there is something to it I will probably "get" it after 2 or 3 listens.

Maybe I'll test this theory out with this album you guys are talking about...what is it about it that is so difficult?

Forget her & listen to Diamanda Galas instead.

I disagree, I don't think there's a set thing you can like, I f*cking hated Hip-Hop. I knew I liked something with a guitar, then I listened to Illmatic about 10 times, and a couple of other Hip-Hop albums, and now, it's not my favourite genre - but I respect it so much more than I used to.

So she is Diamanda-esque? She is great so I might have to check this out...although I don't know how anyone could even hope to imitate her.

>>>>>

The entire album Ys. I quite liked that.

I can't remember to be honest. I listened to Vs when it came out once & hated it.

I was just filing them loosely under the 'chicks with weird voices' bracket.

I love Newsom.

Why? Do you like how boring she is, or does she get more interested each time you listen to her? Thus far I haven't been impressed with her at all. Apart from 1 song.

She seems like prog-folk, if that even exists.

i would classify her as a grower. but just listen to that youtube i posted and make up your mind from that.

Judge from that Youtube video? I like her.

Judge from an entire album I heard? I dislike her.

Albums take priority over 1 song on Youtube. That was a nice song, 'Emily' is sh*te though.

listen to Cosmia from Ys

Prog-Folk exists but she isn't remotely like it. I like her because she has
A)A voice which fits her music perfectly.
B)She has fantastic harp playing skills(an infamously hard instrument to play)
C)Great lyrics
IMO, she has released 3 flawless albums and I love them more with every listen. Boobs went on a rant in the shoutbox about how Indie Folk and Newsoms connection to it and I wasn't having it. She sounds like a Folk artist lifted right from the 60s and I often compare her to some of my favs like Fairport Convention, and you know what? She's just as good.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...galaxie500.jpg

Yet another one I've thought of.

On Fire is one of the most beautiful, melancholic and emotionally-raw albums i've ever heard. I never get sick of listening to this album, it just sounds so captivating. You can really feel the pain and loneliness in Dean's voice at times, his voice sounds strange at first but you really grow to love it after a few listens and it just draws you in. I love his guitar style as well, it's simple yet effective and really adds to the melancholic tone of the album. Niaomi and Damon provide a really solid rhythm section throughout and even Niaomi's lead vocals on 'Another Day' sound really haunting and beautiful.

Let's simply put it this way, it's not an album you'd put on at a party. This is an album you should listen to on your own in your room, with headphones, staring at the walls or out the window and just wishing your life was better than it is. If you can listen to it that way you'll see how great it really is.

Prog folk is a real genre but I don't think she qualifies.

This is one from a while ago, I gave it 2 listens and thought that it wasn't anything special. If I recall rightly, the lyrics never really drew me in. I heard it was a headphones looking at the walls wishing everything was better type of album, but I never thought the lyrics were particularly thought provoking. I'm actually going to give it another listen now, I recently listened to American Football - S/T recently after deciding a while ago it wasn't anything special, not I really like it. It definitely deserves another chance, but I never got how people thought it was so emotional. The melodies seemed nice enough, but nothing really emotional. Again, this is just me trying to remember from a while back. *Opens Spotify*

EDIT: F*cks sake, I might have to eat my own words. I'm actually enjoying it a lot more than last time. 'Tell Me' is a beautiful song.

Yeah, I thought that it may have been. Indie-Prog is a genre as well, I actually like one Indie-Prog band - The Decemberists. What do you think of Indie-Prog?

couldn't have said it better, fabulous album and band.

They were a really great band, it's a real shame they didn't get the recognition they deserved at the time. Today and This Is Our Music are both amazing albums but On Fire is the most consistent and just stands above them that little bit more.

Prog folk is a super broad term, some might overlap it with psych folk like Incredible String Band but its often used to refer to groups like Comus, Roy Harper, Fairport Convention, the kinda folk that Zep was all crazy about and often had a medieval/folklore vibe to it. It often applies the same ideas of prog rock in a folk context. Jethro Tull are often referred to as prog folk, and they are sometimes but they often blur the lines between folk and rock.

Decemberists are also called a prog folk band sometimes. Indie prog? I thought that's what math rock and post rock were. What would you consider indie prog?

Battles? they're considered post rock but theres nothing really post-rockish about them, plus the hipsters go f***ing crazy over this stuff.

There's nothing really indie about Battles though (at least in regards to the genre that indie has become - not indie as a reference to independent labels). And I think anyone who refers to them as post rock is just not familiar with the term math rock.

When I think of indie prog though (not a term I hear often), and I try to define it, all I can think of math rock. It's rooted in indie rock and played by very skilled and experimental players.

Wow. Just when I thought you couldn't disappoint me more.

Shut up. I like it now. I was just digging up old albums I didn't like back then and seeing people's opinions on them.

I like that and American Football now, when months ago I had no time for them whatsoever. Yay.

Good to hear, good to hear.

It's just the perfect epitome of guitar pop music played with a smidge of punk plus it's got a few quirky songs like the incredibly catchy End of a century, the swirling paradoy debt collector and the exquiste love song To the end. By turns It's moving and playful. Every song is inspired and adorned with many a weird and wonderful instrumental touches, breaks such as with the violins in TRacy Jacks or harmonic vocals not to mention GRaham's fantasitc f/x laden guitar solos and Damon's brilliant lyrics touching on a myriad variety of subjects.

the resistance by muse

i thought it was terribly boring compared to their other albums.

http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l1...ybmyo1_500.jpg
it's alright, i just don't think shields is a very good songwriter. there are many soundgasms to be had, but that's about it.

The song 'Sometimes' shows what a brilliant songwriter he was IMO.

Amongst others of course, but Sometimes definitely shows his talents as a songwriter.

Why don't you think he's a very good songwriter? I'd say he was underrated as a songwriter myself...

Well, being the headphone-whore that I am, I don't really see Loveless as a 'song' album. It's a successive bunch of pieces that each melt my mind, based on several different brilliantly-thought out guitar effects. Surely, they weren't the first to use guitar effects to this extent, but to the aptitude and almost bizarre nature of "To Here Knows When"? It's an album brimming with such potential amounts of discovery, in the sense that I could listen to it now and notice just a few more quirks in the soundscape. I find it has a lot of replay value because of something like that.

Albeit, I can pick out individual songs, of course, and I would challenge the songwriter comment. He was a minimalistic kind of songwriter, and he had to intertwine his pop craft into the shoegaze sound, which I'm sure detracts from it a bit aesthetically. But the quality of sound makes the songs' structures almost irrelevant.

i can't agree with this. sounding cool isn't enough for me if there are no interesting melodies. and his songwriting is offensively simplistic. but i can't argue how cool some of the effects sound. ultimately, it is an album that gets one part right and all the rest wrong. so i can never love it.

Well, by 'quality of sound', I don't mean it just sounds 'cool'. It sounds ridiculously original, like absolutely nothing else. The structure isn't simplistic; it's minimalistic, the difference being that the structure is almost never absolutely derivative, yet isn't comprised of too many parts. For example, "I Only Said" has a repeating guitar lick for nearly half of the piece, but during the verses, it's never nearly as redundant. Whatever the chord progression truly is, the instrumentalists never reduce themselves to blatant repetition of those chords in a boring manner. Even in the final 2 or so minutes of the song, where it's just repeating a little guitar lick, by listening intently with high quality headsets/speakers, you will truly hear a lot of sonic difference between each push, making the simplicity seem startlingly original.

I'll admit "Sometimes" is derivative, but it's not unoriginal or simplistic. It's still made up of the original guitar sound, with an infectious chord progression and the trademark vocals.

If you want to listen to lyrics that paint imaginative empires go listen to something else. If you want a hell of an album that is one of the greatest pieces of sound you'll ever experience, listen to Loveless.

your assumptions make me laugh. in general lyrics do very little for me.

that may well be true. but what you need to remember is that this album came out in 1991, back when soundgasms were few and far between to most listeners. that's really what propelled this album to a whole other level. yes there were others doing similar things at the same time and earlier, but none managed to strike a chord with a generation quite the same way this album did. as lame and pretentious as this will sound, you kind of really had to be there.

plus 'Soon' is a glorious track, even though i prefer Medicine's take on that song

YouTube - Aruca by Medicine

I was wondering if anyone would mention Medicine...such a horribly underrated band. Interesting little fact - the singer is Bruce Lee's daughter. I thought that was kind of cool.

Anyway, as far as Loveless goes...you either love it or hate it. People who love soundscapes and atmosphere will usually love it while people who prefer more structured melody and progression will probably hate it. There are better shoegaze albums out there, but this one stands just a little higher than the rest simply because it is a testament to a vision that was not compromised on. No wonder Kevin Shields never looked forward to writing a new album...that guy is too much of a perfectionist.

I listened to the remastered album just last night while going to sleep on my studio phones and let me just say...there is WAYYY more going on in that music than anyone even realizes. I love having to work for the melody and subtleties of the music I listen to. It is so rewarding.

Then why the hell are you complaining about the songwriting?

http://www.totalsoundrecording.com/z...ed%20water.jpg
When I'm not cringing at Paul Simon's voice on this album, I'm being lulled to sleep by the instrumentation.