Poope Shyte editionold >>122546766fag https://pastebin.com/vHeAR1Bt
Based
if you are here expecting metal discussion, you came to the wrong place.
Artist: DarkthroneAlbum: PanzerfaustSong: Beholding The Throne of Might>And destruction upon the holy man>Who hails a jew
For a fag asking for recs previous threadhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9_u-F1gMhM
>leave>always end up coming backeverytime
Kreator - Pleasure to Kill
>THE HECKIN NAZIRINOS CANT KEEP TRICKING ME LIKE THIS
>>122552034https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3McfekO8AY
Chris Barnes is a pussy
The crying Heckjak got totally BTFO'd last thread, here's a little overview of the discussion:>Distortion is not noise, distortion is by defintion predictable alteration of sound, with specific overtones and harmonic structure, often desirable. whereas noise is random and non-coherent addition to the signal lacking harmonic structure and often undesirable.>Distortion is not dissonant, it mostly amplifies consonant overtones like any other timbre (there are exceptions such as bells that have minor overtones)>Human brain can distinguish consonance from dissonance, consonance naturally sounds pleasant to any human brain that has or has not been exposed to any music, whereas dissonance sounds naturally bad, but can become culturally acceptable(probably through mere-exposure effect)>Ad populum has nothing to do with a statistical fact>Dissonance and Consonance are also explained by physics, as all sounds are essentially waveforms which can be described mathematically, and there you will also find that consoance is smooth and dissonance is jagged.>Dissonance and Consonance were terms used by Ancinet Greeks for specific intervals, which, again, sounded either good or badAdditional factoids>No one has produced music more complex than the Western European composers>Music of Bach and Handel can be described as pinnacle of art, anyone who's ever understood a good portion of their music will undeniably agree that they are the masters>no such thing exists in different cultures of music.
>>122552180Chris Barnes is based because he smokes weed cigarettes
>>122552207Chris should form a stoner doom band
>>122552029Varg Vikernes about the Early Norwegian Scene gathering in Helvete(direct quotation):>Turns out that, pretty much everybody were so-called "racist", they were anti-immigration, they were pro-nationalist, we cultivated this
>>122552200No one cares, peepeedrinker
>>122552200Everyone cares, waterdrinker
>>122552220Chris should join cannabis corpse
Varg Vikernes and Piero San Giorgio linked up. Need it or keep it?
>>122552300Saxon
>>122552300https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KH4A5p4oQ5U&ab_channel=DevinTownsendProject-Topic
>>>/s4s/11599905>>>/s4s/11599905
BLASTING>>122551987Nice offtopic pic OP!
>>122552278>>122552297Such intellectual responses. Fitting for this general and dead shit genre.
>>122552320
Metalbros, why am I getting this soi in my recommendations?
you're watching Insahn's show right anon ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0kYXbBaBA
>metal coverwhy is it always metal that does this shit?
>>122552363we want senpai to notice us
>>122552362Have they been playing the same exact setlist (only 1 song from Prometheus) for 20 years now
>>122552180>>122552207>>122552220>>122552307Chris Barnes is a poor man's Bongman.
>>122552362why won't these faggots release new music?
>>122552389Bongman doesn't even smoke weed
>>122552362>In The Wordless ChamberSo they're playing the only great track from Prometheus. Based but not very impressed, vocals are too loud. I really want to listen to his solo project but everytime I try I just get bored
>>122552401I bought his debut solo album on release and have barely listened to it since. The only song I remember was a blatant ripoff of "Lies" by King Diamond.
i love deicide bros
Peesahn sucks poop-covered dickpenis
>>122552427based JRPG fan
>>122552421I tried listening to some of his album and they were all forgettable. Maybe I haven't found the right one yet, or maybe he ventured too far into non-Black territory for me to enjoy, even production is a turn-off, there's no Black Metal to it at all, where as first 2 Emperor albums(pytten core supremacy obviously plays a major part here) are exactly the sound I want in Black Metal, just pure distortion and reverb, and both of them still sound very distinct and uniquehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ye9Q3WRSLMhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3opx5yFJ9sOr maybe he ventured too far into dissoshit/"exotic scales" terriotoryIf there is an Ihsahn enjoyer here, I would like to listen to an Ihsahn song that sounds as close to Emperor as possible
I refuse to believe that Emperor has any fans that aren't fat ugly chicks covered in piercings and cutmarks
>>122552401>the only great track from PrometheusAbsolute faggot take, but I'm not surprised.
this general is dead and all that's left is desperate attention whores
first for brutal dm
>>122552556People don't even drop obscure recs anymore which was the only thing keeping me here besides shitposting
Blasting Ihsahn - Afterhttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLut1Lwl4PR7Kne-YkWivZ21F7b98oD_j5Liking the first two tracks already so far, but yeah it has to be textural. I would probably listen fuck out of this if it was in Black metal style. First track lacks tremolo picking, which usually gives the distortion a whole another dimension. The wall of sound that I'm after is not here.Second trick is playing with harmony in a bad way, and is that saxophone I'm hearing? It's just a bit funny overall, I'm not sure why.>>122552551>Absolute faggot take, but I'm not surprised.Elaborate?I didn't say other tracks suck(some do) but it's the one that stands out the most. Whereas in ATTWAD it's literally impossible to pick a favorite track since it's all 10/10 from start to finish.
Witchfinder General
>>122552307Didn't Cannabis Corpse record a Six Feet Under album with/for him?
>Blasting Ihsahn - After
>>122552578What kind of rec you want
>>122552643Yeah, when it comes to metal it's either Emperor, Obtained Enslavement(and maybe some pyttencore) or just nothing. Logically, almost everything else is inferior, gay and awful. Getting bored of this chugsloppa already, I'll go back to blasting Handel concertos instead.
>>122552578you don't deserve it
>>122552660How about early 90's thrashStygian - Planetary Destruction was breddy gud
Vlad Tepes
>>122552680You sound like the kind of person who jerks to dogporn
>90's thrash>Stygian - Planetary Destruction was breddy gud
>>122552687Have you exhausted South america, that's usually the most obscure stuff
>>122552660>>122552685the duality of /meal/
i got cancer reading that
>>122552691You sound like an insecure dog who's barking too much.
>Have you exhausted South america, that's usually the most obscure stuff
Venom - Welcome to Hell
>>122552685>>122552733You can tell this was the same guy posting
Venom - Not Black Metal
>>122552720You sound like you want to kiss me
>>122552744You can't tell jackshit fag
that's another retard i have to ignore
Emperor is life at Hellfest>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0kYXbBaBA
>>122552618why don't modern bands put tits on album covers?
>>122552779Gay!
Sodom - Agent Orange
>>122552320https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XbLY7IIqkY
>>122552793thankfully they have learned not to objectify women
>>122552779Was posted already >>122552362
the hardest metal known to man
>>122552578Iron Maiden
>>122552759
>>122552319Here? That never happens
>>122552578Check out Black Sabbath
What is a Burzum?
>>122552904this
>>122552902will be there for pentagram
>>122552904One of the last bastions of European spirit. Hope this helps.
Varg is an autistic whoreson
>>122552902More like Keep it Truely Diapery
Varg is a freeloader.
>>122552362why would i when i can watch the better set of them playing their best album to a much larger crowd?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ba-2ag3tgo
>>122552954>WackenGigacringe
>>122552957name why it's cringe (you can't)
>>122552954posers: the festival
>>122552960
>>122552960People are randomly saying things like that to sow discord among our ranks
>>122552954>playing their best albumStill filtered by their actual best and greatest metal album of all time?I can only rec repeated blastings.
you got a problem with the way i dress?
keep black metal raw and trve. no symphonies allowed.
>>122552902The scalp albedo of this concert's attendees will cause air traffic accidents
I like Summoning - Minas Morgul and Dol guldur
>>122553007>implying symphonic makes it less rawComposition > production. Anthems is the peak of any Black metal.>>122553015Stronghold is their best though
>this album is better because i said somany such cases
>>122552979why are metal bitches always fat?
>>122553010first funny bald post
>>122553051Because there's no social status in metal. They don't care about metal that's just where they end up on the pecking order based on their looks.
>>122553051>metal bitchesNo such thing, they just emulate their boyfriends
what metal band committed the most crimes?
>>122552680>Muh Disney musicFuckin end yourself already faggot, no on gives a shit about emperor pr OE. You are just as annoying as that faggots pretending to know anything about music theory, yet he thinks dissonance is a made up buzzwords lmao.
>>122553097Absurd but to call them a "band" would be a stretch
>>122552993i like that album too. how am i filtered by it? nightside eclipse is just better and had a bigger impact on metal. i think you need to take a break from the computer. not everything is an extremist "it's either this or that" situation.
>>122553097The singer from Disturbed signed some Tsahal missiles, even Varg doesn't have war crimes in his pedigree
>>122553107don't engage with the norsecuck
have fun posting the same things over again
>>122552200Anyone who has to make a self-congratulatory summary of an argument has almost certainly been the loser of the exchange.
>>122553142This has been a relatively autism free /metal/ so far
>>122553156Hector just came back so its about to get bad
completely mindbroken
>hector>norsecuck>nsbm/varg dicksuck>j-dawg dicksuck>german bugposter>the serbianwhat other regulars am i missing here? regulars that still post here that is. bongman, negru, etc rarely come here anymore
you are stupid and not worth replying to
I like IX Equilibrium more than Nightside Eclipse
Give me some good metal amp recommendations
>>122553187Is this the new form of autism, throwing directionless comments?
Yes
stop replying to me you moron
Black metal is pathetic and needs to be destroyed.
you and your stupid reddit spacing. get the fuck outta here.
>>122553118>nightside eclipse is just betterIn what way?>i think you need to take a break from the computer. Probably.>not everything is an extremist "it's either this or that" situation.True, unlike hecuck I try not to take things in the extreme "either this or that". When I play on my guitar, at least 50% of my jamming is usually from In The Nightside Eclipse(rest - everything else), I love it as much as Anthems to the Welkin at Dusk.But from compositional standpoint, how can it be "better" than Anthems? Songwriting is much more complex, riffs are more varied, interesting, "epic" and everything else is just done better.>>122553107Melanated megaseething posr.>>122553038If I explained in detail you'd probably say "not reading, too long" like the low IQ melanainhead monkey you are.>>122553155>self-congratulatory?Feel free to argue any point I made instead of babbling nonsense.>>122553191Bad take.>>122553200Just search for what amps your favorite bands are using
Ihsan looks like he jerks it to Rick & Morty hentai
>>122552614>spends his day arguing with hecky>now starts linking youtube with the same filename format and also includes reviewdefinition of getting buck broke lol
>>122553232>Bad TakeI acknowledge that it is. I still love those first three albums but something about Nightside feels the safest to me out of the bunch
Judas Iscariot
>>122553263more like Jewdass Esquire idiot
>>122553251Its been well established for a while that norsecore poster is basically the lower iq version of hektor with even less self awareness
>>122553251>now starts linking youtube with the same filename formatWhat same filename format? I've been using that filename format quite a lot.>and also includes reviewBarely a "review", just trying to get into Ihsahn as Emperor is the only good thing in metal basically.>>122553253Can't argue with that. I prefer ITNE for just sound alone, but IX is less "safe"
>>122553119>The singer from Disturbed signed some Tsahal missilesultra based>war crimescope
>>122552960European version of Gathering of the Juggalos
>>122553186me
Grave - Into the Grave
>>122553324HEIL
>>122553266BASED
Inquisition
>>122553361HEIL
>>122552320Best Ambient Black Metal album.>>122553289It's been well established you're melaninhead monkey with monkey IQ
>>122552578I stopped long ago because I'm not helping the subhuman retards here find good underground music
shit thread
>>122553388>good underground musicNo such thing exists
we got a badass over here
your gonna have to find obscure recs on your own. sorry.
>>122553391>>122553409>>122553438please stop talking to yourself. have some (You)s as a concession
>>122553097Anthrax released 11 albums
>>122553464your trigger tolerance is some low
>>122553471Kek
>>122553119>The singer from Disturbed signed some Tsahal missiles>signs off on someone else's workthe memes just write themselves
i’m here for the memes and that's it
i am trying to learn the outro to dirge for november>>122552066great song!!netflix show dark got me into them, so good
>>122553537>Found out about Kreator from fucking NetflixYou must be at least 18 to post here
nobody told me the circus was in town
>>122553537>netflix show dark got me into themlol same
>>122553562glad to hear you found employment
>>122553304Shalom
last.fm
>>122553579LOL
>>122553549im 21 thank u very much mister
>>122552200Still waiting for that response Iass >>122553132
>>122553609Hipster tourist shit for attention seeking losers. No different from woman's obsession with fashion and looks, lastfm is for faggots who are desperate for "personality" similar to women who are desperate for the new dress.Useless data stealing trash. Hispters will be mocked eternally.
keep blasting metal and you will get tinnitus
>>122552319yes he's right
>>122553663>Hipster tourist shit lmao kid the site is older than you. i was using last.fm when you were still a sperm in daddy's nutsack.
no comment
>>122552200Correct.
>>122552200why do you continue to engage with him? he's brown, vegan, gay, and worst of all a poser that doesn't even like metal. he is a lethal concoction of reasons to laugh at someone.
my farts sound better than this
>>122553186>hector>norsecuckMight as well be the same person. They’re practically twins in their posting habits ;)>nsbm/varg dicksuck>j-dawg dicksuckMultiple shitposters do this>german bugposter>serbianDefinitely individuals
>>122553674exactly
>>122553663Correct.
poser metal
>>122552960It somehow manages to get mediocre lineups, hellfest and rock am ring are way better, hey, even fucking summer breeze is getting pretty great
>>122553664thoughts on this band/album
>>122554141Chris Barnes is loved and respected here.
>>122554141Chris Barnes is hated and mocked here.
more kvqlity trve kvlt svrf mvsic? aspecially something else than second wave norwegianhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfRR8QYc_oU
>>122552320Perfect summer black metal. Very cozy.
https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/12/4406291166506364586look
>>122554401I see a merchant on that cover
>>122554442I looked
>>122552200Finally back home, guess I'll dimantle this since you gave up and took the L on the last conversation >>122553132>Distortion is not noise [...]Distribution is noise, it literally makes the note harder to hear because of the alteration of the tones and comes with a distinctive buzz that in audio engineering would be called noise. Saying it is "often desirable" is not an argument, afterall Merzbow is pure noise and apparently desirable to some. You definition of noise is incompetent and the clipping, buzzing, and wave alteration muddying the fundamental tone would count as noise even in your definition.>it mostly amplifies consonant overtoneNo it doesn't, it amplifies everything and can even clip out entire sections of the overtone. You are an idiot. Also lol at "consonant overtones".>Consonance naturally sounds pleasant to any human brain that has or has not been exposed to any musicI already went over this in the last conversation with the post you gave up to, please refer to >>122553132 and the points about tuning systems and genres. >Dissonance and Consonance are also explained by physicsMathetically one can say there are states, but "dissonance" and "consonance" come with added subjective ties which you yourself use it for, not the objective mathematical data which is impartial to things such as "sound good" or "sound bad">classical good (thats why I spend all day listening to disneycore black metal)your actions and what you post are incongruent.
>>122554576>Distributiondistortion*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2QG09CcqswIs this even metal, I dont know but it sounds good. Does anyone know anything similar with these kind of overlapping distorted vocals and electronic/industrial sound?
The thing about norsecore poster is that he is stuck, he likes childish disney metal like OE but has a deep desire to be elitist. The problem is that every argument for these disneytunes is actually an attack on the very black metal he pretends holds value. I mean here you have him arguing in favor of distortion as a consonant tool or something (only god knows what loony theory he will come back with tomorrow), except that distortion is textural muddy noise that goes against everything Baroque composers stood for. Where you find such techniques is not baroque, but more in line with the modern classical, the very same style of classical he has sworn himself to hate because of some ignorant pol conspiracy in his mind about da joos or whatever.The simple breakdown in his mind is this: "I love disneycore metal ->I must argue in favor of baroque because I wish to larp as the elite->I unintentionally argue against the very disneycore I love to begin with->descend into incoherent arguments and statements that don't line up because I am forever stuck in a silly position".A very similar issue arose when talking about his love for Euroymous, which thankfully he seemed to have stopped mentioning as I imagine the longer the time goes the more he realizes he was being absurd. In that case he would in one breath do things like suggest Bathory wasn't black metal, but then also call a thrashy Mayhem song as black metal. Its total and utter delusion, but he will do or say anything even if his very arguments insult or detract from its premise to begin with. If he believed the things he says then he would neither care for Euroymous nor even listen to any metal at all. His latest roleplay is that of an extremely conservative Baroque fan, but such a person would call all of black metal including his disneycore as worthless and ought to never be listened to.After all, take his very argument against dissonance and apply it to black metal vocals he loves, its beyond silly.
>>122554891Completely Correct
>>122554937Ins a microcosm of the incoherence of second wave black metal fans in general I feel. Like how they can't admit that Death Metal was more extreme than black metal musically, they create some delusional narrative about being the most "extreme", and then what you are served up are twinkle twinkle melodies over a drummer who only knows one beat. Atrocity was making this in 1990, and I don't think BM even touched it until maybe 2001https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvsZqb_0O2gYet during that same period DM was busy with Obscura or Portal's demohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z7W3grkjpoAnd even now I don't think there is a BM band that touches Pyrrhon or Coma Cluster Void in extremity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXvSlFURO0cSure they could argue that the production and shit playing makes them "extreme", but then there is Grindrcore, Slam, or War Shital if texture matters more than musical extremity.
FIRST WAVE REIGNS SUPREME
>>122555133BASED
>power metla bad wher shriek n satan need shriek n edge
>>122555208Power metal is the dumbed down version of shred.
caveman drooling dumb as fuck bdm > all black metal
>>122555240Based and true
>>122552320I picked this album up because the Vertebra Atlantis guy had it as a 5/5 on his rym, and I have to admit its grown on me quite a lot. I can see why he likes it so much, it really does have a similar feeling at times to his work on "The Clearing Path", augmented chords for days. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-sRS7OhaEA
Kultur is a masterpiece
>>122555224shred without form or craft is boring
>>122555297Neither of which Power Metal possesses.
>2. die gasmaskenbildnerthis song is so fucking catchy
>>122553674I had it before I started blasting metal
>>122554442first fragmen getting badmouthed hard in there
>>122555295Is this pepe based off any particular story/book/movie/etc., or is it just a general fantasy pepe? Metal for this pepe?
https://youtu.be/-YHhgiXdN58?si=tLmTRk5ZWulZXcrMFinna listening to this for the first time.
>>122555449based
>Finna
>>122553674You wear earplugs dont you faggot
>>122555420>1. Ein Blitz kommt selten alleinMost clever song title ever
>>122555627answer this you fags
Classicalfags btfo
>>122553051heavy music is for heavy people
Hot heavy metal sluts ready to service your battle axe
imagine naming your band 'necro fag est' lmaooo'
>UDE QUAALUDES LMAO
Depeche mode metal
I need some misanthropic metal to chud out to>>122552345Because you're söy enough to click on recommendations. How people let algorithms steer their minds I wonder and shudder.
>>122553674>blast metal>get tinnitus>blast metal louder>problem solved
let me guess, you need lower tunings....e flat sisters rise. this album rips
>>122557006tuning below D was a mistake
>>122557018perhaps true. choose scary notes. scaring tunings gets old fast
>>122557036Idk if there's really a correlation or if I just notice it more, but it seems like bands who tune really low have a stronger tendency to spam that lowest open string endlessly. The whole "OSDM revival" was full of unriffs played in B standard.
>>122557082well obviously there are some quality exceptions but yeahI was listening to deicide the other day, LegionI forgot how technical and truly brvtal it is for a regular ass tuning
no good music has ever come out of norway, ever.
not as big on Brutal Death Metal as I used to be but catching these suckers in my hometown tomorrow! House shows always have a strange vibe. This particular gig doesn't list the exact address of the house even, they just assume you'll find it using their vague directions. Excited though. First time seeing a New Standard Elite band
Best live albums from recent years?
>>122557181based
>>122556035only at concerts
HELL AWAITS
SHOW NO MERCY
MUNICIPAL WASTE IS GONNA FUCK YOU UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>122556282i realized i never posted the pic so here we go again: CLASSICALFAGS BTFO
>>122557561he's right
>>122557579it's 110
can you explain?
running out of ideas for shitposting, huh?
>MFW face when the swedish melodeath holy trinity of >At The Gates - Slaughter of the Soul >In Flames - The Jester Race>Dark Tranquillity - The Gallery completely solved Death Metal once and for all and the genre has only been downhill from there.
Death - Leprosy
>>122554891hector you are the most annoying 4chan pseud i've ever seen in my life and that's saying a lot
things would be a lot better if we ignored hector
why does a whiny BMTH song get to be the gigachad theme and not real metal
>>122557806Pull the Plug has top 3 solo in dm
>>122557751This post was made in a lab to make a prozak worshiper spaz/lash out
reminder to listen to the king of raw black metal...
>>122553658>>122553132>The mathematical formulas have no bearing on what consonance or dissonance is, Mathematics explain science. It is the language of science.>because consonance and dissonance come with a subjective meaningIncorrect.>Indeed you yourself use it in a subjective formIncorrect. You keep using this strawman when I pointed out that it can be defined mathematically. It cannot be subjective since brain distinguishes these waveforms differently. The consonant waveforms sound natural and makes us feel good, whereas dissonant waveforms make us feel disturbed, annoyed, irritared. This applies to all people, despite their culture. I already proved it and provided studies on which you had no response. >However you did and continue toIncorrect.>a consensus is nothing more than ad populum A consesus only proves what was already a factual: human brains prefer consonant sounds over dissonant sounds. You claimed it was because of cultural influences, I DISPROVED that. Dumbass.>or that the alternative tunings of the rest of the non western world are perceived as "dissonant" to alien culturesTuning will not be perceived as dissonant if it's tuned well(even if it's not tuned in standard western setting), but certain intervals and chords will be. In any equal tuning where octave, fifth and thirds exist, and are apart by same distances as in the western tuning(not necessarily perfect tuning), there will exist consonant intervals - that will sound good to any ear, as the study proved.>and as argued before, any additional alteration to the sine wave is noise, Incorrect.There is no definitiom of noise out there that agreed with this stupid claim. I'm reiterating again, noise is >noise is random and non-coherent addition to the signal lacking harmonic structure and often undesirable.
this guy is an idiot
>>122554576>makes the note harder to hear because of the alteration of the tones Can be said about literally any timbre, as some timbres have different levels of overtones. "Harder to hear" is not an argument.>Saying it is "often desirable" is not an argument,Interesting how you went over the point that it has harmonic structure. Often desirable means it has clear definition(which you still have to provide) by which the word can be defined in a dictionary. It's also what it sets it apart from noise.>distinctive buzz The "crunch" sound comes from the timbre, which are overtones. Also the interaction of these overtones with each other. Since guitar massicely amplifies all overtones(and overtones of overtones) it gets that crunchy sound, which is unrealted to noise.>and wave alteration muddyingNo such thing as muddying, alteration causes only overtones to be amplified.>No it doesn't, Yes it does.>it amplifies everything Sure, provide a picture of waveforms.If it amplified everything it would sound nothing like guitar. The only thing that defines an instrumental timbre are overtones.>I already went over thisI went over this as well right here as well >>122551961 and seems like I provided a study and logical reasoning, whereas you have not.>"dissonance" and "consonance" come with added subjective tiesWhy are we repeating the same? Quoting myself:>It cannot be subjective since brain distinguishes these waveforms differently. The consonant waveforms sound natural and makes us feel good, whereas dissonant waveforms make us feel disturbed, annoyed, irritared. This applies to all people, despite their culture. I already proved it and provided studies on which you had no response. >classical good (thats why I spend all day listening to disneycore black metal)All day? Lol you wish.
I just wanna hear someone else's (serious) take on this, do you think dissonance/consonance are subjective? Given that>physical sound waves are fundamentally different, consonant sounds are smooth and have regular patterns, whereas dissonant sounds are jagged>cultures(people of amazon) that have never been exposed to western or any kind of music, can instantly distinguish between consonant and dissonant intevals/chords, there have been studies on this>consnant sounds are more frequent in animals such as birds, even our voices, that is why we evolved to notice (and like) consonant sounds moreMight as well stop arguing with the schizo if there is anyone sensible out there. Explain with science, or any studies if I'm wrong.
Jesus fucking Christ, get a life
Blackened death metal vs. black/death metalIs there a difference?
>>122558657isn't that war metal?
>>122558657deathened black metal
>>122558657>Blackened death metalMetal with both Black and Death elements, bands such as Belphegor, Behemoth, Hate play in that style.>black/death metalUsually used for War Metal bands, in which there is 0(zero) trace of Black metal besides aeathetics and Satanism. Basically War Metal is just lo-fi Death Metal that likes how Black Metallers look like. Not realated to Black Metal musically.
>>122558706>deathened black metalmore like deafened black metal cuz i mute that shit instantly LMFAOOOO
at what point did death metal stop being old school?
>>122558726when the subgenres started cropping up?
>>122558725thanks for sharing
>>122558725wait that doesn't even make sense
other genres don't use the old school label, just death metal.
>>122558781For Black Metal it's "True Norwegian Black Metal" instead
>>122558781TrueBlack metal has "waves"Idk if there's an agreed upon term for thrash metal, but there was definitely a distinction between classic thrash (American big 4) and the heavier thrash that came later
>>122558841>Black metal has "waves"Waves are also used in DM. It's fake&gay journalist terminology.
Black metal bores me. Discuss cool metal like thrash and stoner doom.
>>122558860>Black metal bores me.Your problem, fag
>>122558860>Chug and repetitive drone metalYou sound boring m8. I bet you are fun at parties
>>122558860Trouble - Trouble
have a good night's sleep metalheads
>>122559068>nightIt's day you retard
>>122559079yes but there are many anons here who are from america and they dont sleep yet because they hate sleep
coffee. problem solved.
>>122558942>partiesYou as a black metalcel wouldn't know since your kind is not invited to those
stop giving in to the normie propaganda and blast metal
recs for a 90s 2000s metalhead who hasn't listened to anything made after 2012?someone sent me majesties - vast reaches unclaimed and it triggered something in me now i like metal again. the in flames trio (jester race, whoracle, colony) and the first 3 kalmah albums are really doing it for me right now. yeah i know basic as shit taste. don't care i'm feeling it. - subgenre agnostic but im still burned out on black metal.- i don't like random/overly proggy metal i like song structure and sovl.- i'm a drummer unique/non generic drums = yum.- if its older than 2012 i might have forgot it exists feel free to rec.
>>122558860do you like wolf blood anon? strong recommendalso listened to a ton of ttbs lately
>>122559124you listened to metal in its prime. no point going further.
>>122559140that majesties album legitimately sounds like a lost late 90s gothenburg album to me. a good one at that.
>>122559124more OSMDM
>>122559238Those guys blow. I went to take a shit during their set when they opened for Meshuggah and did not regret it one bit
>>122551987Here's my shitty chart
>>122559257Better taste than 99% of this general even with the rather average picks unfortunately. I'd suggest Nattestid Ser Porten Vid.
Flo Mounierhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_1RZcM3zso
>>122559257>The Mantle>Burzum>Epitaph>Focus>Symbolic>Exercises in futility>A Blaze in the Northern SkyYes
>>122559346legend
1993
>>122559368The year metal started to get good. 1996 was the peak
>>122559257You're clearly new, but everyone started somewhere
>>122557149
>>122559124>drummerCheck out Zemial - Nyktait's proggy but not overly sohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R31WBNqMVFk
>tfw they see you wearing your 5XL Infectious Jelqing shirt, your camo shorts and your propeller hat
How did they manage to make black metal album this good in 21st century?
>>122559886Because you have brain damage
>>122559944shalom
>>122559949Aleichem shalom
OH WITH GENTLE HANDS HE DID SWAY MEOVER THE FLAMES TO STRENGTHEN AND PURIFY
>>122558465>do you think dissonance/consonance are subjective?No and yes. Without prior exposure to dissonant music, dissonance will sound "bad" to almost everyone. When you've been exposed to dissonant music for a long period of time it ceases to sound as harsh and abrasive yet is still perceived as dissonant. In that sense dissonance, at least, is subjective or at least some form of brain damage.
>>122558465>do you think dissonance/consonance are subjective?no
>>122558860>Black metal bores me.TRUE. AS A BDM-CHUD FOUND BESTIAL TO FIT MY LANE QUITE WELL, THOUGHBEIT.
>>122558267>Mathematics explain science???? What are you even talking about anymore, you are lost. >You keep using this strawman>makes us feel good,So its a "strawman", yet within the very same post you again use it as a subjective justification. There is stupid, and then there is this post. >A consesus only proves So just as above, you deny the claim, and then... prove my claim as correct anyways. At this point I do nothing and win. I don't even know why I'm typing this out. >if it's tuned wellWestern tuning is literally not tuned properly, a piano is literally off tuned 100% of the time. Learn what Tet is. True tuning is perceived by people as being mis tuned because of culture and tradition.>noise is random and non-coherent addition to the signal lacking harmonic structure and often undesirable.There is no definition in a dictionary saying it is "random". This is your own made up definition that I don't need to follow. If you want to be pedantic here is the dictionary definitions for you to readhttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/noiseAsk any baroque fan if he finds distortion in his symphonies "agreeable", and you are a Baroque elitest are you not? Perhaps you can ask yourself about Black Metal vocals too, and the blast beats, and the production, and basically everything in metal. From what I understand the general populace finds almost nothing agreeable about extreme metal, nevermind a baroque conservative, however let us hear you case for this hahahaha.
These pathetic failures at life are seriously still sperging at each other
>>122560222how long are they going to keep this up?
>>122560109The point I made is that there is inherently a difference between the two, and that naturally human brain has tendency to prefer consonance(despite any cultural influence). I also said previously that you can get used to dissonance >>122552200>whereas dissonance sounds naturally bad, but can become culturally acceptable(probably through mere-exposure effect)As some cultures have rather dissonant folk music even. I'd argue that is because they did not study music like the Ancient Greeks, then Romans and Germans did, otherwise they would've come to the same conclusions about intervals, even if it wasn't 12 tone based system
>>122560249>>122560249>>122560249NEW
This discussion is more embarrassing than Dave Mustaine's singing ability
>>122560211>What are you even talking about anymore,Mathematics is the language of science, yes. Those waveforms explain the physical soundwaves that are formed in real-life as you are playing the notes.>yet within the very same post you again use it as a subjective justification.This is not a subjective justitifation:>Human brain can distinguish consonance from dissonance, consonance naturally sounds pleasant to any human brain that has or has not been exposed to any music, whereas dissonance sounds naturally bad, but can become culturally acceptableNeither are the waveforms that are fundamentally different, for consonant intervals and for the dissonant intervals.>So just as above, you deny the claim, and then... prove my claim as correct anywaysSo if we make consesus about polticial beliefs, and the results are that 50% of the population are democrats, will it be "ad populum" to claim that 50% of population are democrats? Or will it be just stating facts that 50% of people prefer democracy? How fucking stupid you are.>Western tuning is literally not tuned properlyNo shit. Perfect tuning doesn't exist. That doesn't disprove my claim.>not using signal noise definitionTotal brianlet moment. Here's what noise means >In signal processing, noise is a general term for unwanted (and, in general, unknown) modifications that a signal may suffer during capture, storage, transmission, processing, or conversion.[1]>Sometimes the word is also used to mean signals that are random (unpredictable) and carry no useful information;>The noise signal, on the other hand, is unpredictable.https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/noise-signalBy your very own defintion, distortion is still not a noise since distortion is pleasant and desirable.Self-BTFO at this point.>Ask any baroque fan Ad populum hypocrite strikes again>and you are a Baroque elitest are you not? No, and I'd like you to stop using cringey buzzwords
>>122558370>"Harder to hear" is not an argument.Actually as I pointed out in terms of pedantic dictionary definitions I am actually very much correct in this "b: any sound that is undesired or interferes with one's hearing of something", and the "or" does exist there so please do not clip the sentence in half. >Often desirable means it has clear definitionAgain, this is just not an argument, Merzbow is "desirable" for people, or are they no longer noise now? You can add literal white noise to your music and have it desirable, these are subjective nothings. You don't seem to be able to understand what is or isn't subjective, and your points fall apart because of it. >No such thing as muddyingJust pure delusion at this point, the Baroque elitest who believes all music is equally clear and identifiable. Intermodulation with distortion simply doesn't exist for his mega mind, despite the fact he himself noted the reason for power chords being played with distortion only last thread.>Quoting myself:>makes us feel goodAs with the other post, here you are again proving that you are using it in a subjective form in the very same post. >Lol you wish.Truly I wish that no one would listen to disneycore even for a second, and as mentioned: a Baroque conservative would agree with me.
You are both wrong btw
>>122560323>"b: any sound that is undesired or interferes with one's hearing of somethingIncorrect definition. Look up signal noise.Also, even by that definition, there is no noise in distortion. Every instrument has its own timbre and its own overtones, that doesn't make any of it "noise". Distortion is just another type of timbre.>Merzbow is "desirable" for people, or are they no longer noise now?Noise can be desirable too. But in most cases, it is undesirable. It's right in the definition.>Just pure delusion at this pointJust pure copium
>>122560322>Mathematics is the language of scienceThese statements are irrelevant because consonances and dissonance are no longer mathematics when they are tied to the subjective use that you have consistently used them for. >Human brain can distinguishOk lets teach you about subjectivity like I would with a child, a "human brain" is able to distinguish a b note vs a c note, the idea that a b note or a c note is "better" or "worse" is subjective. You can mathematically work out what a b note is, but there is no mathematical formula for "better" or "worse". There are impartial statements about something: "this painting uses a blue coloring", and there is a subjective statement about the same thing: "blue paintings are good".>So if we make consesus about polticial beliefs, and the results are that 50% of the population are democrats, will it be "ad populum" to claim that 50% of population are democrats? So you are proving what I said before: "You mean ad populum, average, consensus, mob rule, democratic, and so on and so forth.". With no sense of irony you have even used a democratic example for your argument. I do nothing and win. > That doesn't disprove my claim.On the contrary it does, because western tuning is inherently dissonant and incorrect.>Here's what noise means This site is not a dictionary, its completely irrelevant what the two authors "Dokkyun Yi" and "Booyong Choi" decided to state.>distortion is pleasant and desirable.Again, another subjective nothing, I gave you an example of someone who does not find it pleasant or desirable, the Baroque conservative: aka your latest role play. >Ad populum Its not ad populum, what makes you think I agree with or support the stance of Baroque conservatives, remember, that is you YOUR larp. >NoThat part is obvious yes; the question was a rhetorical one made to mock your sniveling and groveling towards Baroque conservatism despite clearly not belonging to such a group.
>>122560379>Incorrect definitionThat's quite literally the dictionary definition.>even by that definition,By that definition everything besides the fundamental sinewave is noise. Intermodulation with distortion literally by its nature "interferes with one's hearing of something", part of the reason power chords are a thing with distortion. >Noise can be desirable too.I literally said that in the same line," You can add literal white noise to your music and have it desirable, these are subjective nothings". I don't need you to repeat myself, I need you to become a real human being and understand what subjective judgements are.
I like how Heckster pretends to talk with authority on the subject when it's painfully obvious he has no idea what he is talking about.
>>122560521Feel free to join the argument if you think yourself more knowledgeable. >Its not worth my time!>I have better things to do>I don't feel like it>Make me>No reply>Snarky post without linking to this one>Buzzword riddled nonsense>Generic insultsYour concession is accepted.
Its not worth my time! I have better things to do and I don't feel like it, make me
Guys. I listened to all metal that has ever been created. I'm bored. Give me something phenomenal that I haven't heard yet. But beware. If it's bad or mediocre, I will find you and nail you to a cross.
>>122560454>These statements are irrelevant because consonances and dissonance are no longer mathematicsThey are described by physics using mathematical systems, for us to better understand their behavior. Comletely relevavant and on point. Subjective use is your delusion. What I'm saying was empirically proved by studies and also purely by mathematical models. >the idea that a b note or a c note is "better" or "worse" is subjective.The way we interpet something as bad or good is not subjective. Predators are threat to our life and genes, that is why we(our genes) evolved to have inherent fear of predators. Just because someone was dumb enough to pet a lion and lose his life, does not mean the inherent fear is "subjective".>I do nothing and win. Non-argument and self-btfo.>On the contrary it does, because western tuning is inherently dissonant and incorrect.Nope. It's tuned correctly enough to avoid any major dissonance.>This site is not a dictionaryLol cope. I provided 2 definitions, here's third onehttps://www.safeopedia.com/definition/749/noise-signal>Noise signal is sometimes used informally to refer to any ratio of useful information to irrelevant information. Noise can be defined as unwanted electrical or electromagnetic energy that degrades the quality of signals and data.Signal noise is defined in a lot of the sound engineering books, you can go ahead and read all of them and cope more.>Again, another subjective nothing,No, not really. Distortion is man-made&INTENTIONAL. Noise is UNINTENTIONAL. Stop being such a dumbass.>Its not ad populum, what makes you think I agree with or support the stance of Baroque conservativesIt is. I don't see why I should care what they have to say in any sense.
Even I as a card-carrying Heckophile I have to admit the Sisterposter is demolishing OURGUY here.
>>122560502>That's quite literally the dictionary definition.Of noise, not signal noise. Two different things.>By that definition everything besides the fundamental sinewave is noise.No. An interva(such as an octave) can be desirable. It does not "interfere" with the fundamental note. Here is the definition of interfere>to involve yourself in a situation when your involvement is not wanted or is not helpful: The octave can clearly be wanted and be useful.>Intermodulation with distortion literally by its nature "interferes with one's hearing of something"Nope. Read definition of interference.
>>122560772You forgot the gook avatar Iass.
Trannypoper getting dookie-owned epically
>>122560749>Subjective use is your delusionNo, its your delusion, you are the person making subjective statements that have nothing to do with mathematics.>The way we interpret something as bad or good is not subjectiveThat is literally subjective, like almost a pure definition of subjective. >tuned correctlyIts quite literally tuned incorrectly, this is objective reality, not a subjective nothing about the tuning being good or bad, but an empirical and objective description of the tuning system. >"safeopedia"This is just embarrassing, stop linking me random sites when you have a dictionary whose entire purpose is the definition of words. Please refer to an actual dictionary instead of "Dokkyun Yi", "Booyong Choi", and "safeopedia"https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/noise>Distortion is man-made and intentionalMerzbow "music" is man-made and intentional, you are an idiot. >I don't see why I should care what they have to say in any sense.Hypocrisy coming from a man who uses "consensus" as an argument, and indeed you now are agreeing with me, for the purpose of the Baroque fan was not "ad populum", but a rebuttal to ad populum where you describe distortion as "desirable" or "agreeable" or any other subjective nothing based on "consensus", the point was to show it was certainly not the case for these people, and it relates to yourself because they are your latest LARP. You can't seem to keep up in this conversation and think lazy "no u" approaches will work on me, all you've done is embarrass yourself.
Ok. I'll be the better man and concede.
>>122560934You forgot the gookpop avatar Iass.
>>122560777>of noiseAka the word I have used since the beginning, nor is "signal noise" a word. There is a signal to noise ratio, but there is no "signal noise" word, which is probably why you have to rely on "Dokkyun Yi", "Booyong Choi", and "safeopedia" for your definition of it. >can be desirable>be wantedAll you offer is the same subjective opinions over and over and over again. Your total abuse and farcical attempt to be scientific are nothing more than a sad cover up for what amounts to "thing I like = good".>Nope.Total delusion, intermodulation with dissonance not only interferes with ones hearing, but also creates DISSONANCE. This is again, the reason why only power chords where previously played with distribution, and also to a lesser degree why palm muting was used. You know which genres decided to not care about creating dissonance via intermodulation? Thats right Black metal. The genre you promote, yet end up attacking with your own poorly thought out arguments every day.
>>122561017>distributionDistortion*
Isn't it enough you that you humiliated me out of /clasical/, sisterchad? Enough already!
>>122561123Never happened, I will return to /classical/ when I listen to classical music, just as I come back here if I am listening to metal. Nor do I think sister spammer and norsecore poster are the same. Also you forgot the gookpop avatar Iass.
>>122560879>nothing to do with mathematics.>is literally explained by physics on atomic levelsWhat did he mean by this? Lol.>That is literally subjectiveNot in the context I claimed. Where I said that we have inherent fear, and that fear is not subjective.>Its quite literally tuned incorrectlyCorrectly ENOUGH* is what I said, stop twisting my words.>This is just embarrassing, stop linking me random sites What is a "random site"?Here is fourth definition that literally says the same>noise, in acoustics, any undesired sound, either one that is intrinsically objectionable or one that interferes with other sounds that are being listened to. In electronics and information theory, noise refers to those random, unpredictable, and undesirable signals, or changes in signals, that mask the desired information content. https://www.britannica.com/science/noise-acousticsFrom Britannica.Now just stop coping you're making yourself look so dumb it's funny.>Merzbow "music" is man-made and intentional, you are an idiot. Irrelevant to the fact that distortion is intentional whereas noise is not(in MOST cases) by the very DEFINITION.The same way pain is not something we inflict upon ourselves, because pain is undesirable. If someone inflicts pain upon himself, it doesn't become desirable.>Hypocrisy coming from a man who uses "consensus" as an argumentThe consensus merely states that what has been evident from empircal evidence we already have, is further reinforced by the fact that there is an UNIVERSAL tendency for consonance/dissonance, the same way there is an UNIVERSAL tendency for disgust of feces. Because we EVOLVED to have this tendency. It is a natural instinct, however it was not very evident, so the people of Amazon were tested.>indeed you now are agreeing with me,Stop trolling dumbass
Quite honestly, Hector should be embarrassed for the absolutely sad display on /classical/. He got schooled epic style and became a laughingstock.
>>122561017>Aka the word I have used since the beginning, nor is "signal noise" a word.Only "Signal Noise" is correct in this context. And even by your definition of noise, you're wrong.>but there is no "signal noise" wordThere is and I linked 4th site, this time a prestigious dictionary.>All you offer is the same subjective opinions The existence of inherent emotional response is not subjective.>Total delusion, intermodulation with dissonance not only interferes with ones hearing, but also creates DISSONANCE. It does create dissonance, and so does every timbre. What matters is how much dissonance it produces for it to actually be distinguishable. When you play C on piano, some of the later overtones are dissonant, but you wouldn't call that dissonant. Distortion is not dissonant.But distortion does not "interfere", we use distortion to our advantage.
>>122561172>atomic levelAh yes, the atomic "sounds good" particle, just recently discovered on 4chan.org/mu by the basket weaving forum's greatest intellect. >Not in the context I claimed.Yes, in the context you claimed. >stop twisting my words.I never said you spoke anything, only that the western tuning is quite literally tuned incorrectly and inherently dissonant. >any undesired soundSo according to Briannica it is entirely subjective as to what noise is or isn't. After all Merzbow is desired by some, and not by others.> is intentional>If someone inflicts pain upon himself, it doesn't become desirable.Merzbow's music is intentional and (apparently) desirable, so you don't consider it to be noise? Also if someone is intentionally harming themselves for the purpose of pain, it is "desirable" by definition. There are people who enjoy cutting themselves for the pain. >The consensus merely statesThe consensus is merely a consensus: an average, a democratic vote, mob rule, ad populum and so on and so forth. I have presented a plethora of situations and groups that rebuke the consensus, but ad populum is your real target, not any sort of intelligent thought. >Stop trolling dumbassWhat trolling? The "Baroque fan" was a rebuttal to "consensus", and then you turned around and agreed that we ought not to pay any attention to their consensus. Also I have to laugh that after two back to back food analogies, you also made a shit comparison in this post. A true 4channer.
>>122561218> even by your definition of noiseIt is not "my" definition, it is the dictionary's definition, nor have you explained what is wrong. >There is There is not, even the link you presented is not "signal noise" because such a term does not actually exist, you merely thought so after reading a single random post from "Dokkyun Yi" and "Booyong Choi", then had to frantically search google for any other reference of such a thing leading you to "safeopedia" and eventually linking a dictionary that does not even include a single instance of "signal noise" in it.>emotional response is not subjective.That is quite literally and objectively what subjective is. >It does create dissonance, and so does every timbreAnd so here we have you finally in agreement with me about alterations to pure sinewaves. >When you play C on piano>you wouldn't call that dissonantActually I would because Pianos are not tuned correctly, as per western tunings they are always off. However Pianos are not distorted and we are speaking of distortion, in which case it would be extra dissonant if you had a distorted piano from the intermodulation. After all, as according to yourself the distortion increases overtones, and the so to with "dissonant overtones", when applied to chords this manifests itself to an even greater degree with intermodulation, and clipping literally interferes with the sinewave where it loses its original shape entirely with while sections being removed. As I always say norsecore poster, your arguments are against distortion, your larp is that of a baroque conservative who would hate metal, you attack yourself because you are stuck in a silly position you put yourself in as I stated here >>122554891
>>122561268>Ah yes, the atomic "sounds good" particleMore like "how we interpret the soundwaves particles">Yes, in the context you claimed. Nope. The existence of inherent emotions is not subjective.>inherently dissonant. No. Even if that's how you choose to use the word, you're incorrect. Since you won't even be able to tell perfect consonant C note(if there is such a thing in the first place) with only consonant overtones - from standard C note on a piano.>So according to Briannica it is entirely subjective as to what noise is or isn't.According to Britannica, noise is UNPREDICTABLE and RANDOM signal. I think it is very clearly stated in the definition.>Merzbow's music is intentional and (apparently) desirable, so you don't consider it to be noise?It is noise. And it is desirable in a certain context by certain people. It does not make Merzbow's noise inherently desirable on biological level. >There are people who enjoy cutting themselves for the pain. And because these people exist, it doesn't change the fact that it is inherently undesirable to harm oneself. This is exactly like if you'd would argue that humans don't have 5 fingers on each hand, but 4.9999999 because that's the average. >The consensus is merely a consensusThe statistical, empirical evidence (call it "consensus" or whatever) is an evidence. Re-read analogy here >>122560322It's nothing but a fact. It's not an idea, it is a fact.>What trolling? The "Baroque fan" was a rebuttal to "consensus"I'm totally lost on this Baroque shit which is irrelevant to the point and it's based on your idea that I like something which was not even brought up in this conversation. So do not expect me to comment further on this.
Merzbow mogs the shit out of any Hectorcore.
>>122561513thank you tranny-kpopper
>>122561428>It is not "my" definition, it is the dictionary's definition, nor have you explained what is wrong.The definition that you brought up.>There is not, even the link you presented is not "signal noise" because such a term does not actually existIt does. Noise in Signal Processing(what i called Signal Noise, as in Noise produced by or within signal) is a scientific termSource: " Vyacheslav Tuzlukov (2010), Signal Processing Noise, Electrical Engineering and Applied Signal Processing Series, CRC Press. 688 pages. "A Britannica articlehttps://www.britannica.com/science/information-theory/Discrete-noisy-communication-and-the-problem-of-error>In electronics and information theory, noise refers to those random, unpredictable, and undesirable signals, or changes in signals, that mask the desired information content.Do you see that noise in information theory(which the computer sounds are based on) has the meaning which states>random, unpredictable, and undesirable signalsDo you see yes or no, because this is fucking ridiculous at this point.>That is quite literally and objectively what subjective is. Again, why are you twisting my words? Or in this case, cutting off words that fucking matter? >The EXISTENCE of inherent emotional response >And so here we have you finally in agreement with me about alterations to pure sinewaves. A pure signal of say C note sounds like this(no overtones)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKi78RF7vckIf we add an octave, it won't be pure sine, but it will have no dissonance. Let alone dissonance you can hear.>Actually I would because Pianos are not tuned correctly,A perfect tuning doesn't exist, and you wouldn't be able to tell even if you claim you would.>in which case it would be extra dissonant Guitars are probably extra dissonant than Pianos, yet we do not call guitar timbre dissonant. Retard.
>>122561428>> even by your definition of noise>It is not "my" definition, it is the dictionary's definition, nor have you explained what is wrong.>>There is>There is not, even the link you presented is not "signal noise" because such a term does not actually exist, you merely thought so after reading a single random post from "Dokkyun Yi" and "Booyong Choi", then had to frantically search google for any other reference of such a thing leading you to "safeopedia" and eventually linking a dictionary that does not even include a single instance of "signal noise" in it.>>emotional response is not subjective.>That is quite literally and objectively what subjective is.>>It does create dissonance, and so does every timbre>And so here we have you finally in agreement with me about alterations to pure sinewaves.>>When you play C on piano>>you wouldn't call that dissonant>Actually I would because Pianos are not tuned correctly, as per western tunings they are always off. However Pianos are not distorted and we are speaking of distortion, in which case it would be extra dissonant if you had a distorted piano from the intermodulation. After all, as according to yourself the distortion increases overtones, and the so to with "dissonant overtones", when applied to chords this manifests itself to an even greater degree with intermodulation, and clipping literally interferes with the sinewave where it loses its original shape entirely with while sections being removed. As I always say norsecore poster, your arguments are against distortion, your larp is that of a baroque conservative who would hate metal, you attack yourself because you are stuck in a silly position you put yourself in as I stated here >>122554891correct
>>122561582>>It is not "my" definition, it is the dictionary's definition, nor have you explained what is wrong.>The definition that you brought up.>>There is not, even the link you presented is not "signal noise" because such a term does not actually exist>It does. Noise in Signal Processing(what i called Signal Noise, as in Noise produced by or within signal) is a scientific term>Source: " Vyacheslav Tuzlukov (2010), Signal Processing Noise, Electrical Engineering and Applied Signal Processing Series, CRC Press. 688 pages. ">A Britannica article>https://www.britannica.com/science/information-theory/Discrete-noisy-communication-and-the-problem-of-error>>In electronics and information theory, noise refers to those random, unpredictable, and undesirable signals, or changes in signals, that mask the desired information content.>Do you see that noise in information theory(which the computer sounds are based on) has the meaning which states>>random, unpredictable, and undesirable signals>Do you see yes or no, because this is fucking ridiculous at this point.>>That is quite literally and objectively what subjective is.>Again, why are you twisting my words? Or in this case, cutting off words that fucking matter?>>The EXISTENCE of inherent emotional response>>And so here we have you finally in agreement with me about alterations to pure sinewaves.>A pure signal of say C note sounds like this(no overtones)>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKi78RF7vck>If we add an octave, it won't be pure sine, but it will have no dissonance. Let alone dissonance you can hear.>>Actually I would because Pianos are not tuned correctly,>A perfect tuning doesn't exist, and you wouldn't be able to tell even if you claim you would.>>in which case it would be extra dissonant>Guitars are probably extra dissonant than Pianos, yet we do not call guitar timbre dissonant. Retard.just wrong
>>122561428>you attack yourself because you are stuck in a silly position you put yourself in as I stated here >>122554891 #Also not reading that shit since it's not part of the discussion. Feel free to reiterare and reply to me if you're so desperate. Baroque music has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion and you seem desperate to somehow fit it into the argument, as you probably realized yourself that you are an idiot.
hecky, just give up. you got bested.
>>122561616Thank you tranny-kpopper1
Pretty jarring to see a pretend-intellectual like WInston confronted with an actual high IQ individual. He has been reduced to spouting incoherent nonsense.
>it is subjective!>*continues to argue*hector doesn't even have a reason to keep yapping yet here he is
>>122561489>how we interpretInterpretation is literally another subjective term, you can't help yourself.>The existence of inherent emotionTotal red herring. You don't even know what you are arguing about anymore.>you're incorrecI am quite literally correct, western tuning is not tuned correctly and that is objective reality. A perfect c note can easily be obtained via electronics, the piano being an instrument that is tuned to the dissonant western false tuning with the addition dissonant nature of acoustic instruments is not relevant.>According to BritannicaBritannica: "Noise, in acoustics, is any undesired sound that is intrinsically objectionable or one that interferes with other sounds that are being listened to.">It is noise. And it is desirable in a certain context by certain people.And ladies and gentlemen here we have it, a certified concession by norsecore poster. Of course we will continue to argue, but this right here is the single most important moment there will be. Now all we have left really is semantics and pedantic nothings, the concession that it is subjective is ultimately the main issue.> it doesn't change the fact that it is inherently undesirable to harm oneself. It does actually. An inherent quality is something like "humans cannot live without blood", there is no human alive without blood, it is an inherent quality of humans. That there are humans that enjoy hurting themselves, meaning it is not an inherent quality. Now you will argue the semantic definition of inherent, but the reality is that it will be another variation of "consensus".>call it "consensus" or whateverActually I believe it was yourself who called it that. And remember, as with the Baroque fan, so to can any consensus be dismissed as the faulty ad populum it is.>I'm totally lost on this Baroque shitI know, because you aren't that smart, you can barely comprehend abstract ideas like subjectivity, I might even suggest you don't actually understand it at all.
>>122561652Thank you tranny-kpopper2
>>122561667It's the only form of human interaction he gets. Just a cycle of endless, pointless arguments.
>>122561675>>how we interpret>Interpretation is literally another subjective term, you can't help yourself.>>The existence of inherent emotion>Total red herring. You don't even know what you are arguing about anymore.>>you're incorrec>I am quite literally correct, western tuning is not tuned correctly and that is objective reality. A perfect c note can easily be obtained via electronics, the piano being an instrument that is tuned to the dissonant western false tuning with the addition dissonant nature of acoustic instruments is not relevant.>>According to Britannica>Britannica: "Noise is any undesired sound that is intrinsically objectionable or one that interferes with other sounds that are being listened to.">>It is noise. And it is desirable in a certain context by n people.>And ladies and gentlemen here we have it, a certified concession by norsecore poster. Of course we to argue, but this right here is the single most important moment there will be. Now all we have left really is semantics and pedantic nothings, the concession that it is subjective is ultimately the main issue.>> it doesn't change the fact that it is inherently undesirable to harm oneself.>It does actually. An inherent quality is something like "humans cannot live without blood", there is no human alive without blood, it is an inherent quality of humans. That there are humans that enjoy hurting themselves, meaning it is not an inherent quality. Now you will argue the semantic definition of inherent, but the reality is that it will be another variation of "consensus".>>call it "consensus" or whatever>Actually I believe it was yourself who called it that. And remember, as with the Baroque fan, so to can any consensus be dismissed as the faulty ad populum it is.>>I'm totally lost on this Baroque shit>I know, because you aren't that smart, you can barely comprehend abstract ideas like subjectivity, I might even suggest you don't actually understand it at all.True
>>122561675>Interpretation is literally another subjective term, you can't help yourself.No. There is a common ground to interpetations, because of how we evolved.>Total red herring.LOL. First you ignored by initial claim and used strawman, now it magically turned into red herring. Dumbass>western tuning is not tuned correctly and that is objective reality.No shit? On pure C read this post >>122561582>BritannicaAnd why did you skip over the words that I mentioned(in picrel)??At this point, you're just not only stupid but extremely dishonest.>concessionDelusion. Noise is by definition an unpredictable and often undesirable sound. The analogy explains it well.>It does actually. An inherent quality is something like...No, it doesn't. It is in the gene of every human alive that you should not hurt yourself. So yes it is inherent.>I know, because you aren't that smart, you can barely comprehend abstract ideas like subjectivity,I can but it is not relevant here. And >>122561667 is right if you believed it was subjective yourself, you wouldn't be arguing at this point.
>>122561582>The definition that you brought up.The definition according to the dictionary, which is the standard for such things apparently, correct. >what i called Signal NoiseExactly my point, only yourself knows what "signal noise" means, the term doesn't exist outside of your poorly educated mind who picked it up from one single post from the duo "Dokkyun Yi" and "Booyong Choi".>in formation theoryAnd now you mention this term the second you read it from the dictionary, despite having no prior knowledge of such a thing otherwise you would have mentioned it before. This is desperation and last second "research" that amounts to watching someone fumbling around on the floor picking up loose change so they can afford a ticket into the theater of argument. > why are you twisting my wordsThere is no twisting of words, I am directly quoting what you say, it is not my fault you can only communicate in subjective nothings. Ultimately it is your own fault because the basis of your argument and mind begin with "how can I prove my opinions as correct?", and not "are my opinions correct?". Your goal is to defend disneycore that you love, and because of that your reasoning is poisoned from the start. >If we add an octaveHas nothing to do with distortion, irrelevant red herring. >A perfect tuning doesn't existJust intonation, which western 12 tet doesn't use. >Guitars are probably extra dissonant than PianosI never said they weren't or mentioned guitars at all, another irrelevant red herring. Standard tuning is dissonant, non-western music is perceived as dissonant by westerners but not the natives, and most people don't know distortion produces dissonance (like yourself). There are many examples of low quality thought, but we must proceed with objective reality that these are dissonant.
>>122561943>The definition according to the dictionaryFor which I linked you the correct page already.>only yourself knows what "signal noise" meansNo, noise in signal is pretty much used everywhere in scientific journals. And how does this matter exactly? Try arguing the point instead of semantics? You have not answered "Yes" on my question so I must assume you're trolling or dumb as a rock.>And now you mention this term the second you read it from the dictionary, despite having no prior knowledge of such a thing otherwiseHow is this relevant? LOL you're so fucking desperate. Yes I've known about information theory because I'm fucking studying STEM in university.Still, no argument for the definition provided.>There is no twisting of words, I am directly quoting what you say,You are quoting only certain parts, not the entirety of the sentence.>Has nothing to do with distortionGoalposting LOL. It has to do with the idea that only pure sin wave is not-noise. GOALPOSTING.>I never said they weren't or mentioned guitars at all, another irrelevant red herring. Who said you did?Standard tuning is dissonantRead >>122558267>Tuning will not be perceived as dissonant if it's tuned well(even if it's not tuned in standard western setting), but certain intervals and chords will be.>non-western music is perceived as dissonant by westerners but not the nativesYou're using the same fake ""ad populum"" you're accusing me of, and no you're STILL wrong. Just because natives grew to enjoy those dissonant intervals doesn't mean they cannot tell that it is dissonant as you claimed "perceived as dissonant by westerners but not the natives"
>itt: Hector humiliation-ritual
>>122561840>a common groundAnother variation of "consensus", ad populum, average, mob rule, democratic, majority, and so on and so forth. Same words over and over again, its either ad populum or subjective nothing terms. You are hopeless. > First you ignored by initial claimNo, first said "The way we interpret something as bad or good is not subjective" to which I replied "That is literally subjective, like almost a pure definition of subjective.", and now you have descended into incoherent red herrings about "inherent emotions".>No shit? Glad we agree that the western tuning system is inherently dissonant and that the only reason it is used everywhere is because of tradition and culture. >And why did you skip over the wordsI didn't, I quoted the very beginning sentence which ends on a period meaning the thought was closed. You have never once mentioned "electronics or information theory" before posting the definition upon being asked for a better source 3 times. It is irrelevent to the conversation, and as pointed out here >>122561943, its very obviously your last second gasp for air while drowning. >Noise is by definitionBy definition:https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/noise"a sound or sounds, especially when it is unwanted, unpleasant, or loud: "https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noise"A sound, especially : one that lacks an agreeable quality or is noticeably unpleasant or loud "https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/noise"Noise is a loud or unpleasant sound."https://www.britannica.com/science/noise-acoustics"noise, in acoustics, any undesired sound, either one that is intrinsically objectionable or one that interferes with other sounds that are being listened to"Two of these state it to simply be a sound, with further explanation being that it is likely a sound that is "unpleasant", which is where all four are in unison, the description is that of a subjective notion.
>>122561840>I canYou yourself stated you couldn't, I will quote yourself right here "I'm totally lost on this Baroque shit". Feel free to explain if you think you can, I'm all open ears. >if you believed it was subjective yourself, you wouldn't be arguing at this point.And why is that?
>>122562151Thank you tranny-kpopper3
>>122562167>Another variation of "consensus", ad populum,An inherent quality written i human genome is not "ad populum" guy>The way we interpret something as bad or good is not subjectiveThe way we interpret something is purely a genetical/psychological. Again, read analogy of fear and predators.This is not red herring, but you failing to understand the point from the very beginning where I claimed dissonance is naturally interpreted as something undesirable because of structure of our brain and thus our genome.>Glad we agree that the western tuning system is inherently dissonantIt is incorrect to call it dissonant, as I explained here >>122561582 in the last sentence.> I quoted the very beginning sentenceBut not entirety of the sentence which contains the information I'm trying to convey.>By definition:By definition from sound engineers and scientists in the field of information theory? Here it is:>In electronics and information theory, noise refers to those random, unpredictable, and undesirable signals, or changes in signals, that mask the desired information content.https://www.britannica.com/science/information-theory/Discrete-noisy-communication-and-the-problem-of-errorYou have never even attempted to answer my point because you doubted that formal definition of noise (in signals) includes words: "random, unpredictable, and undesirable"Now that I presented you an undeniable evidence that this is a formal definition, you are deflecting and goalposting instead of arguing if the formal definitio is incorrect or if I'm reading something wrong(even though it clearly states the exact same words I used)
>>122562126>For which I linked you the correct page already.And it was to my favor, if you wish for more examples I listed 4 different dictionaries which include what you linked to me here >>122562167>Try arguing the point instead of semantics?I've been trying, but you decided to argue about what noise means so we are stuck here with me quoting 4 dictionaries at you until you concede. >How is this relevant?I feel like nothing else could be more relevant than mentioning your argumentative tenancies that show off how quick you are to latch onto terms you only found out about mere seconds ago and use them as an facade of knowledge you don't really possess. >only certain partsYou haven't quoted a full sentence from me in this post yet in any greentext, a hypocritical attack that shows it to be nothing more than a bad faith defense. What you wrote was quite literally and objectively what subjective is. >GoalpostingWhat? The previous statements were about sine alterations, adding other octaves has nothing to do with such things and is a red herring. >Standard tuning is dissonantCorrect, total western tuning death soon brother, Inshallah. >you're using the same fake ""ad populum"" you're accusing me of,False, I'm actually rebuking ad populum by showing off there there are different groups with different tastes in which those groups having their own "consensus" on what is "desirable" or not. >Just because natives grew to enjoy those dissonant intervals doesn't mean they cannot tell that it is dissonantThat is actually the case that they don't believe them to be dissonant, after all dissonant comes as an "undesirable" sound according to yourself. Yet clearly their "consensus" is that it is "desirable".
ist black metal krieg?
>>122562197>You yourself stated you couldn'tI said this>I can but it is not relevant hereWhich means that it is not relevant here.> I will quote yourself right here "I'm totally lost on this Baroque shit"What I meant by this is that I don't understand in what context does Baroque music fit into the discussion, and I couldn't decipher your text here>>122560323 or >>122560879 etc.I have no reason to even agree with your claim that I'm a Baroque fan.>And why is that?Well, if you believe that dissonance is subjective, perception of dissonance is subjective, why are you even arguing about sin waves, or the fact that indigenous people of Amazon prefered consonance over dissonance? Because they both go against your narrative. And if you are trying to disprove these claims(that sin waves depict real waveforms or the amazon study) then why are you not adressing them directly, instead of arguing that they are not relevant(while in fact they are and that's why we study them)?You probably have nothing better to do
>>122562329>An inherent quality From "concensus" to "common ground", to "inherent quality", how many ways can one man attempt to conceal the same ad populum?>Again, read analogy of fear and predators.I already dismantled it here, which you never responded to >>122551956>It is incorrect to call it dissonant,It is quite literally correct to call it dissonant. >But not entirety of the sentence I quite literally quoted the sentence, do you know what a sentence is? The period marks the end of a sentence. Have you never been taught what a sentence is?>By definitionBy definition of the dictionaries, which I linked 4 of including the one you linked. >information theoryAnd now you can't stop mentioning it despite never stating it before, since you believe it gives you more credibility instead of making it obvious you lack any real knowledge of the subject besides what you are currently in the middle of googling, predicable, but tiring. >Now that I presented you an undeniable evidenceYou presented me evidence in my favor and then showed off that you don't know what a sentence means. Your evidence "Noise, in acoustics, any undesired sound, either one that is intrinsically objectionable or one that interferes with other sounds that are being listened to.". The rest of the evidence:https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/noise"a sound or sounds, especially when it is unwanted, unpleasant, or loud: "https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noise"A sound, especially : one that lacks an agreeable quality or is noticeably unpleasant or loud "https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/noise
make a new thread so i can make my post and leave
>>122562410>And it was to my favorIt was in my favor since you disputed my claim that ranodmness and unpredictability are part of the definition here >>122560454You said>This site is not a dictionary, its completely irrelevant what the two authorsI provided more examples yet here you are, not adressing those facts.>but you decided to argue about what noise meansYes and noise defined more than a century ago(in fact noise comes from latin) is not relevant to the noise we are discussing right now. So it is improper to use it instead of the NEW definition in the field of science and technology.>I feel like nothing else could be more relevant than mentioning your argumentative tenancies that show off how quick you are to latch onto terms you only found out about mere seconds ago and use them as an facade of knowledge you don't really possess. Projection much? I've been studying mathematics in music, so I had some knowledge especially concerning distortion. YET this is somehow STILL irrelevant and your desperate attempt to criticize me. No definition I provided is wrong or wrongly interpreted, you haven't even addressed it properly(randomness, unpredictability).>You haven't quoted a full sentence from me in this post yet in any greentext, But I answered the entire idea haven't I? Unless I missed something then feel free to correct me. I'm correcting you all the time and you're still not answering my questions.>What? The previous statements were about sine alterations, adding other octaves has nothing to do with such things LOL. LMAO.There goes your entire dunning kruger effect. Octave DOES change the pure sin wave, learn something before posting this bullshit ffs.>having their own "consensus" on what is "desirable" or not. So yes you use the same fake """ad populum""">That is actually the case that they don't believe them to be dissonantBelief has nothing to do with any of this. They realize dissonant intervals have more tension and that they are DIFFE
Complete Hector destruction.
>I said thisYes, you did indeed say "I'm totally lost on this Baroque shit" as that is a direct quotation of what you said.>I don't understandThat was the point, yes, you don't understand. >I have no reason to even agree with your claim that I'm a Baroque fan.So you just spam Bach links here daily because you aren't a fan, you promote Bach and Handel are the "pinnacle of art" yet aren't a Baroque fan? Pathetic weaseling to say the least. >if you believe that Nearly everything you wrote after this is a strawman because you still don't understand subjectivity. It is objective to for instance say what a sine wave IS, but the subjective part comes from the "good" or "bad" portion of any statement. What I argue against is your nonintellectual mistaking of objective and subjective. I mean we are still on step one here, I've been waiting for us to get to the next stage where we could have discussed if natural or innate things are themselves "good", but instead we are just here with you in loops because abstract things like subjectively seem to be impossible for you to wrap your head around. You're just really slow to grasp these things, and I'm waiting and waiting for you to realize what I already know so we can get to the next part of the conversation. As stated here >>122561675 the concession was the most important detail of this conversation, I imagine just like the Oyveystein thing I'll have to wait for like 4 months for your mind to reconcile the issue. Almost like off screen character building in a way.
>>122562550>From "concensus" to "common ground", to "inherent quality", how many ways can one man attempt to conceal the same ad populum?I've mentioned inherent quality 12 times at this point already.>I already dismantled it here, which you never responded to You were responding to another anon there. Only first reply was my post. What I meant by anaology is this >>122560749>It is quite literally correct to call it dissonant. Nope, because then every timbre is " dissonant" - which isn't true since we humans cannot hear dissonance at such small levels.>I quite literally quoted the sentence, do you know what a sentence is?This is the entire sentence from Britannica that I linked 2 or 3 times already>In electronics and information theory, noise refers to those random, unpredictable, and undesirable signals, or changes in signals, that mask the desired information content.https://www.britannica.com/science/information-theory/Discrete-noisy-communication-and-the-problem-of-errorThe outdated definition you found on another page of Britannica is mockingly foolish in this context.>And now you can't stop mentioning it despite never stating it before, Again, goalposting that is not relevant. Try arguing the point instead.>You presented me evidence in my favor and then showed off that you don't know what a sentence means.I just disproved that.
>>122562627>It was in my favor None of thesehttps://www.britannica.com/science/noise-acoustics"Noise, in acoustics, any undesired sound, either one that is intrinsically objectionable or one that interferes with other sounds that are being listened to."https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/noise"a sound or sounds, especially when it is unwanted, unpleasant, or loud: "https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noise"A sound, especially : one that lacks an agreeable quality or is noticeably unpleasant or loud "https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/noise"Noise is a loud or unpleasant sound."Are in your favor. Only one mentions in relation to information theory, it is random, of which you had never before mentioned the term "information theory" until you just read it second ago and now include it in every post.>What I meant by anaology is thisAnd which predators are or are not is not based on our fears of them, emotional responses are not an objective measure of something being a predator or not. Fear is a subjective feeling an individual may or may not feel for certain stimuli. >This is the entire sentenceYet you stated I did not quote an entire sentence, when I did, its the very first one ""Noise, in acoustics, any undesired sound, either one that is intrinsically objectionable or one that interferes with other sounds that are being listened to.". So did I or did I not quote a full sentence?>you found What form of schizophrenia is this? Norsecore poster, who linked Britannica to begin with? Answer the question you absolute idiot. >goalposting that is not relevant. Completely incoherent at this point, you have no idea what "goalposting" means.>I just disproved that.Did I or did I not quote a full sentence Norsecore poster? Are you not even able to tell me this much anymore? Will you dodge and cry about your sentence despite you saying "not entirety of the sentence", was the quote a full sentence or not?
>>122562700was for this>>122562448
>>122562720>I've mentioned inherent quality 12 times at this point already.Yes I know, you run around in circles dancing over different words to say the same thing over and over again. >What I meant by anaologyReplied to his here >>122562854 by accident>then every timbre is " dissonant" That would be quite literally correct on a mathematical level. >we humansSubjective remark not based on mathematics, I can only assume the "concensus" ad poplum makes a return here. >his is the entire sentenceAnswered here>>122562854 by accident>Again, goalposting that is not relevant. Answered here>>122562854 by accident>I just disproved that.Answered here>>122562854 by accident
>>122562854No, none of these are the correct definition from this era. >In electronics and information theory, noise refers to those random, unpredictable, and undesirable signals, or changes in signals, that mask the desired information content.https://www.britannica.com/science/information-theory/Discrete-noisy-communication-and-the-problem-of-errorThis one is.>term "information theory" until you just read it second ago Irrelevant to the point. Still deflecting.>And which predators are or are not is not based on our fears of themLet me reiterate the point>Predators are threat to our life and genes, that is why we(our genes) evolved to have inherent fear of predators. Just because someone was dumb enough to pet a lion and lose his life, does not mean the inherent fear is "subjective".Why are you not addressing this exact point I made here? What I'm saying is that fear is an emotion that inherently exists in genome, and thus every and each one of us.>Yet you stated I did not quote an entire sentence, when I did, its the very first one ""Noise, in acoustics, any undesired sound, either one that is intrinsically objectionable or one that interferes with other sounds that are being listened to.". So did I or did I not quote a full sentence?No, you did not quote full sentence from the Britannica page I linked. This is not the correct definition, but an outdated one from centuries ago.>What form of schizophrenia is this? You not clicking the link form of schizophrenia.>Completely incoherent at this pointThe fact that I mentioned information theory(in the right context btw) is not relevant to this discussion in any way, shape or form.>Did I or did I not quote a full sentence Norsecore poster?Nope. The full sentence is here (which I'm linking for 5th time):https://www.britannica.com/science/information-theory/Discrete-noisy-communication-and-the-problem-of-error
Hector won
>>122562627>I provided more examplesI provided 4 dictionaries definitions including one you linked (or according to your latest schizophrenia >>122562720, apparently I linked it first now lol) >the NEW definitionLol. >. YET this is somehow STILL irrelevant As I said, there is nothing more relevant than pointing out your habits and bad faith in an argument.>But I answered the entire ideaAs did I, what you wrote was quite literally and objectively what subjective is.>Octave DOES change the pure sin waveWere you saying you are "adding" an octave, or "changing" the octave? Both mean very different things. >So yes you use the same fake """ad populum"""That you do, yes, it was the highlight the flaws of the ad populum, correct. Using someone else's logic to dismantle the original logic is a very fine form of rebuttal. >that they are DIFFEAs with the b note and c note example or the blue painting example, you may recognize difference, but to say c note is "good" or blue painting is "bad", is subjective nothings.
>>122562947>Yes I know,So why do you pretend I'm "dancing" over different words? >From "concensus" to "common ground", to "inherent quality"?>That would be quite literally correct on a mathematical level.Yes, on mathematical level but not on "audible" level which is what ultimately matters.>inb4 but you brought up mathematics yourself!I did because in that case the results(of notes clashing in dissonant chords) were both much more visible on a graph and more audible. Not in the case of timbre. We don't call guitar or piano timbre dissonant.>Subjective remark not based on mathematics, I can only assume the "concensus" ad poplum makes a return here. ? It is not subjective FFS. Feel free to provide a study that says otherwise.>answered by accidentHuh
