Do people still care about this album or band?
>>130793527Not really. They just did a 30th anniversary tour off that album and I know at least 1 person who went, they had a new album some years back that I've heard nothing about.I'd toss it in the pile with the countless other indie adjacent albums that had some staying significance through pitchy's hey day but nobody thinks about anymore. I along with other oldheads probably revisit it every couple years but as of right now I don't think any youngins are digging this one out and pretending it's some obscure gem they found
>>130793527I do, but I am geriatric (29). As the other anon said, they're touring this album as well as Tigermilk right now. I went to see both shows in Chicago and they drew a pretty good crowd. Most in the audience were at least middle aged, but there were a few youths. The new stuff doesn't do it for me, but they had a solid decade of classics, which is far better than most bands.
>>130793527No. It’s not popular on tiktok. Zoomers don’t care.
>>130795279Good, fuck zoomers
>>130793527Great album, I still spin it from time to time
>>130795621This album sucks old man
>>130795667>Refuses to explain why it sucks
>>130795678bc I feel nothing from it
>>130795699That’s your problem, buddy
>>130793527Zoomers are right about pitchfork indie. I’d rather listen to Crowbar any fucking day over this junk.
>>130795732Pro tip; they’re not
>>130793527I'm 38 and it's been a very long time since I listened to Belle and Sebastian. I loved this album when I was 14 though.
>>13079352737, used to like them, think they're faggy now, its so aggressively milquetoast
>>130796431Chud
>>130796558cute but wheres the lie
>>130796578That you think your opinion is the truth.
In general zoomers seem to be more into the overall "sound" aspects of music, production, texture, and so on, which is why they can listen to sped-up and slowed versions of songs without consideration for the original track's integrity. It may be that popular songwriting, which arguably saw its biggest leaps and triumphs in the 20th century, will remain confined to that era. It's a world of knob-twiddlers, not bands.Moreover, early B&S also belong to a world of "hipsterdom" (for lack of a better term) that's gone, even among the milieu they spawned in. Their elitist and countercultural stance would probably be considered offensive today. Records of course hold up extremely well and there's still plenty to relate to but the context is fading, soon to be as alien as the hippie commune.
>>130793527They're really annoying to listen to.
>>130793527they are fine and have some interesting songs and nice moods but I odn't really go out of my way to listen to them
I saw B&S in concert long ago now, enjoyed myself, went alone but made friends with people there, but seeing them play the same exact songs 15 years later for 15x the original ticket price, can't do it. Sorry, too desperate for American dollaridoos there aren't we lads>>130796670you guys are missing the twee revival on social media i guess. the lofi analog twee acoustic with a guy and girl singing is back, but instead of lyricism and wordplay being front and center like it was in 2000s twee hipster music, the lyrics are 5th grade level emotionally stunted nepobrat diary entries done in mumblecore fashion. my point is that B&S still stands as a foundational band for the twee sound. but kids these days don't have the whole >ooo i'm obsessed with Velvet Underground and Nico's solo records and Burt Bacharach and obscure AM radio pop songs and mods/skinheads/teddieboys
>>130796595most awkward reply i've gotten all year
