-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Kanye West presents Yeezus |OT| #YeezySeason Approaches
- Thread starter enzo_gt
- Start date
double jump
you haven't lived until a random little kid ask you "how do you make love".
while I don't think its fair to compare them. ram is my first contender for aoty so far.
Ken Masters
Banned
As an admitted Kanye stan, I finally heard this album today, gave it a few spins on good pair of headphones and on full blast in the car to do the album justice.
With that being said, I would have to say that my initially day 1 reactions are this is his weakest solo album. That doesn't mean it's bad, still think it's good, solid 4/5. But wouldn't put it ahead of any of his previous solo albums.
With that being said, I would have to say that my initially day 1 reactions are this is his weakest solo album. That doesn't mean it's bad, still think it's good, solid 4/5. But wouldn't put it ahead of any of his previous solo albums.
Thanks based yeezus.
I agree (dat giorgio by moroder). But both albums aren't comparable at all. One is incredibly polished and mastered, the other is raw and rushed.
man of science
Neo Member
This. I remember listening to Spaceship in the stock room, working retail... But now, even though I can't relate to 99% of the shit he raps about, I still enjoy his "act". The real test will be his next album, but I'll be damned if he hasn't had a fantastic run. I loved the 808s influence on Yeezus. Glad to see it back. Favorite tracks: Black Skinhead, New Slaves, I'm in it, Blood on the Leaves and Bound 2 topped them all.
Very true, but I have Yeezus over RAM for AOTY, and RAM was my AOTY up until this point. Kanye just took things up to another level, I'd love to hear the"over-produced" versions of these tracks Rubin referred too.
Rastafarian42
Member
I love them both too much right now to make a decision but I have to let Yeezus breath a bit first before I make any decision.
Ken Masters
Banned
I used this on KTT
It silenced all the Fantano Stan's
Ken Masters
Banned
but if he gave Yeezus 10/10 he'd be a good critic
Byakuya769
Member
808 is better, this album is overindulgent shit. I listened to Born Sinner and was embarrassed for Cole, then I threw this in and started liking Born Sinner more.
XANDER CAGE
Member
...no, that's not what I said at all. Or did you miss the part where I wrote "I don't take his word as a critic"? I think he's great to listen to for raw descriptions of music, I don't particularly care for his critical muscle. That applies whether I agree with him or not.
I agree. I think there are a few tracks on RAM that I like more, but they're still both great.
Daft Punk on their work on this album:
On Sight and Black Skinhead were the two songs they were main producers on.
Kanye didn't have any material when he met them, he was looking for ideas. He was really tense and just needed to yell. Their session was the start of the work on the album.
As a contrast to Daft Punk's Touch which had 250 tracks, On sight had only 1.
They jammed a bit like they did back in '95. Some other producers would touch it up later but it ended up really close to the original work.
Thomas felt he was working in his service, a bit like when he made music for Gaspard Noé.
Kanye would then travel the world an gather tracks everywhere, but Guy-Man thinks it was good for him to work with them at the start and then have Rick Rubin clean up everything at the very end to keep everything raw and punk.
They think it's funny that this album came out a month after their own, a record made in very short time compared to the five years they spent on RAM.
Here's the interview in french: Radio Nova - Daft Punk
On Sight and Black Skinhead were the two songs they were main producers on.
Kanye didn't have any material when he met them, he was looking for ideas. He was really tense and just needed to yell. Their session was the start of the work on the album.
As a contrast to Daft Punk's Touch which had 250 tracks, On sight had only 1.
They jammed a bit like they did back in '95. Some other producers would touch it up later but it ended up really close to the original work.
Thomas felt he was working in his service, a bit like when he made music for Gaspard Noé.
Kanye would then travel the world an gather tracks everywhere, but Guy-Man thinks it was good for him to work with them at the start and then have Rick Rubin clean up everything at the very end to keep everything raw and punk.
They think it's funny that this album came out a month after their own, a record made in very short time compared to the five years they spent on RAM.
Here's the interview in french: Radio Nova - Daft Punk
Ken Masters
Banned
Right I feel that the two SNL tracks are the strongest, love the Cudi and Charlie Wilson bits also
Fixed, and even then still it's such an oblong comparison.
Ken Masters
Banned
true, but that's what happens when you compare different genres
Ken Masters
Banned
I also question the mixing of this album
I was listening to it in the car with my dad.
He turned the volume up. And he usually turns it down (with every song).
Ken Masters
Banned
you got a pretty hip dad to be turning that up
lolololololol
Sounds about right. Probably as tedious to make as it is to listen to.
Team Jones
Member
On sight sounds like a super old DP beat. Like pre-homework.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2i0skatDaE
It actually took a lot less than 5 years. I think 5 years counts everything, them fucking around with sounds in the beginning, the tron ost (hiatus from producing their album), etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2i0skatDaE
It actually took a lot less than 5 years. I think 5 years counts everything, them fucking around with sounds in the beginning, the tron ost (hiatus from producing their album), etc.
Ken Masters
Banned
I read that also, that's fucking dedication
So the amazon version seems like it is compressed version of the world itunes version from what I went back and just listened to.
Lol. I gave up.
And what does Pitchfork do? Most of their reviews are long winded essays that have nothing to do about the album.
I bought the physical version from Amazon to get the Amazon digital version.
My digital music library will have the us itunes version in it.
The irony of all of this, is Ye is supposedly a perfectionist with his songs, but he can't finish an album before a deadline anymore.
XANDER CAGE
Member
Not sure if you're actually wondering my opinion on this or trying to catch me out for not responding similarly to the Pitchfork score, but either way here goes:
Pitchfork's surface-value scores tend to align with my opinion more often than not, but I agree that their text is often terrible. I actually play a game sometimes where I count the number of paragraphs in a review before they mention the album they're covering. They have a well-meaning but overbearing obsession with reviewing everything "in the moment" in a cultural sense, rather than judging the music itself. I have rarely seen mastering or other technical criticism be a main point in a Pitchfork review.
They also have a few bizarre hangups - most notably, they seem to have it out for bands they know have been hyped up overseas in magazines like NME. Their review of Alt-J's album from 2012 was terrible, as it spent several paragraphs maligning the band for having a lot of buzz (as if Pitchfork wasn't capable or responsible for generating hype) and "sounding like Radiohead," which isn't really true at all.
They also do it a lot less now than they used to, but Pitchfork's gimmicky reviews fucking suck. Straight up. Their review of Nine Inch Nails' The Fragile, for instance, or their reviews of Black Kids or Jet where they just posted a low score and a mean-spirited picture/video indicating how much they hated the album. Sure, it's funny, but it should be beneath a proper publication. A lot of people accuse critics of flexing their writing muscles every time something particularly good or bad comes out; Pitchfork is one of the only publications that makes it bleeding obvious that they do that.
The poster-child for their weirdness is this recent review of the Illmatic re-release. Would I consider Illmatic a 10? Hell fucking yeah I would. But read that text. I can't make it through without feeling embarrassed. It reads like a stoned college student's first impression of the album. It's so exaggerated it hurts, which is impressive considering how hard I think it is to hyperbolize how excellent Illmatic is. This review also practically ignores the technical aspects of the rerelease, which is far more important in my opinon - is it remastered? Is it noticeably different? You get zero sense of the actual rerelease's worth from this review.
So yeah, I give Pitchfork something like a 6.2 or so. I'm interested in the scores they give because they are undeniably tastemakers, rI think part of the problem is they know they're tastemakers.
10 songs for 10 dollars? Sounds good to me
Stabby McSter
Member
i paid itunes 11.99 :<
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked