[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/mu/ - Music


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


I recently listened to vespertine and Homogenic, and I liked them a lot, maybe I liked Homogenic more than Vespertine. In what order should I listen to the rest of her discography?
>>
just do the order they came out
>>
>>128900331
Yeah exatcly, I definitely agree with that.

Her debut is awesome so you're safe to go and you'll enjoy it
>>
Start with the 3 Sugarcubes album if you're a rockist.
>>
>>128900237
Homogenic, Vespertine and Volta are all a balanced combination of pop and weird Bjork, they tend to be the most liked of her albums bc of that. You could go before Homogenic and listen to Debut and Post for a more pop focused Bjork with dashes of weirdness here and there or move forward after Volta (including Medulla) to a mostly weird Bjork with brief moments of popness at times. Sugarcubes and Tappi Tikarrass are it's own thing.
>In what order should I listen to the rest of her discography?
It's up to you really, tho I can't stand most of Bjork's pop period.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.