ITT: times scaruffi was right

I use Cred Forums to find new artists, not to shittalk what other people listen to.

I agree with you. PH is like your typical alt. rock debut album. Was fine but that's it.
Also, In Rainbowns deserves more score.

I know, that man is retarded.

how do you even get 2s? Scaruffi gave Britney Spears 3s and he called her a bigger hack than The Beatles.

to be fair half of these are good scores by scaruffi standards.

With the exception of Animals and The Wall he's pretty spot on

Pitchfork once gave an album a 0.2

Like I don't even understand how that metric can work, but the short answer is who gives a shit they're all arbitrary

THE FACT THAT

i suspect they take all their staffs scores and make an average, and then add or take away points after the fact based on the artists ethnicity/sexual preference
like gayness and blackness probably increase the score by about 1 or 2 points

>DSOTM, Animals and Final Cut that low
>The wall and Meddle that high

Answer is: never.

This. I love the concept of Cred Forums, I even get a kick out of a lot of the memes. But the critic worship is straight up retarded.

I have yet to see any evidence that Scaruffi knows what he's talking about. He will never pass meme status for his cringe manifesto against the Beatles.

He's also a fucking self-proclaimed philosopher. Literally no better than a facebook atheist deep thinker.

Wings > Beatles

You take that back motherfucker

Lmao. This is how defensive plebs get when their le Beatles are attacked. Wings were a better band both technically and in a live setting. Also they had better songwriting because it was mostly just unfiltered Paul McCartney without self important hippie philosophy and spiritual nonsense that the other Beatles brought to the table.

The ONLY thing that was superior about the Beatles was their production and their collaboration with George Martin. (Only 1 Wings song got this treatment)
>Live and Let Die

He's only "right" if you understand and agree with how he rates albums. Which most of Cred Forums doesn't understand. For all the times that Beatles copypasta gets posted, almost nobody here realized that it contains his criteria for how he views music. Annoying, really.

>enjoying music requires that certain criteria must be fulfilled

Please end your life before you procreate and contaminate the gene pool.

Oh my god, bless your heart. Poor little guy didn't get that I'm being post-ironic.

Bless Scaruffi's heart. It is much older than mine.

Hey, another one who doesn't understand how he rates albums. Protip: He enjoys the majority of his 6.5/10 albums you fucking moron.

Super æ, or Super aR (Birdman, 1998), is Red Crayola meets Faust while Lou Reed is playing his Metal Machine Music in the background. Plus, Eye's clownish musical persona often turns high-brow experiments like Super You (an exercise in unreleased doom-like tension ripped apart by sudden shocks of laser power-drills before the vaudeville-esque coda) and like Super Are You (a hysterical version of Captain Beefheart's subhuman blues) into perverted cartoons. Meanwhile, the cosmic "om" of Super Are for vocals and organ drone leads to a shamanic invocation and to a raga-psychedelic freak-out in 1960s style. Super Shine, one of the many tribal dances on the album courtesy of satanic drummers Yoshimi Yokota and Kazuya "ATR" Nishimura, picks up impetus along the way, intoning a martial singalong and turning minimalist repetition into a collective exorcism.
The problem with this stage of the Boredoms is that great ideas are often stretched and diluted into overlong performances. The looping, charging Super Going distills some of Gong's space-rock verve and some of Can's cerebral inertia. Another percussive peak competing with Super Shine, Super Coming would be the highlight, thanks to a pulsing Velvet Underground-esque orgy with sneering Ministry-like vocals, except that it goes on five or six minutes too long. Female drummer Yoshimi Yokota and her cohort ATR can flood any piece with avalanches of drumming but the others haven't quite found out a mature way to contain her.
Nevertheless, these seven austere compositions rank among the most irrational and capricious kind of progressive-rock ever documented on record.

6.5 out of 10 for Super ar. That's your only hint for how the rating system works you imbecile.

Kek even Paul admits the Wings sucked

Nah the old wop Jew can die for all I care. I really hope he gets tricked into fucking a B& and gets picked up by authorities. Lord knows he's already done it before

>Paul McCartney's opinion matters
>the guy who wrote Wonderful Christmastime
>the guy who released NEW
>the guy who wrote Freedom

The most senile musician in the game.

the fact that he ranks himself as one of the greatest poets of the past 100 bugs me. its highschool tier

>nd organ drone leads to a shamanic invocation and to a raga-psychedelic freak-out in 1960s style. Super Shine, one of the many tribal dances on the album
Accuracy of ratings aside, holy shit he is a terrible writer

Nigga he also put out Ram, literally that one release makes your entire point irrelevant

oh yeah? what's the best, most obscure thing in your daily listens you've found on here?

i mean he already has a scale on his website if you don't know how it works
5 = mediocre
6 = good album but polarizing
7 = great album but not essential
8 = essential
9 = masterpiece
10 = perfect/greatest of all time

I know, right? But people don't come here to discuss music, they come here to shitpost.

>Not all he wrote is 10/10!!!! His opinion doesn't matter!!!
Also wrote the best Beatles songs (and the worst) and Ram, not a perfect artist but an amazing one.

I mean for fuck's sake.

"good album but polarizing."

On Cred Forums alone there are constant threads arguing the 6.5/10 Radiohead albums, which is better and the quality of each. For fuck's sake in this thread ALONE:

john and george wrote the best songs, fight me

When he was 29 years old. Before a 20 year alcohol binge and a major coke habit. Before his best friend was shot and killed. Before his soul mate died of cancer. Long before he said that Wings were bad.

that's exactly what polarizing means you turd

>

he was using cocaine during the recording process of Sgt. Pepper. the dude was pretty messed up about the loss of his friends and of course Ringo probably wouldn't even want to speak to him.

John wrote their worst songs. Fight me.

>no reply, loser, Norwegian wood, nowhere man
I literally don't even have to go past 65 to prove you wrong, he only got better as time progressed

I know, my point was that people on here like to criticize his ratings yet lo and behold he's correct in that example.

Tangerine Dream had to work really hard to get 23 2s in a row.

Yes, by the time he did his Rock n Roll album in the 70s, he was by far the most successful solo Beatle.

...

True. Imagine, despite how mediocre it actually is, will always overshadow all of Pauls solo work.

>what is McCartney
>what is Ram
>what is Wils Life
>what is Band on the Run
>what is Venus & Mars
>what is Wings at the Speed of Sound
>what is Wings Over America
>what is London Town
>what is Back to the Egg
>what is McCartney II
>what is Flaming Pie

It's almost as if you have no idea what youre talking about. If it werent for popular music critics and 70s memes, Wings would be viewed as being superior to the Beatles.

But luckily we're magically allowed to have opinions on albums without listening to them at all. So youre right, I must be out of my mind.

Go ask 10 people who appear to be under 18. Ask them if they know any of Pauls solo work. Then ask them if they've heard Imagine. Chances are the latter will have more people saying yes.

...

all beatles solo work except for george harrison is pretty shite tho

oh my god hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha you're so fucking stupid

nah

Literally eat your words

Is it challenging having down syndrome? Or since you know no other reality, do you just roll with it?

most beatles albums as a group are shite too

Not relevant.

>In Rainbows
>5/10

objectively no

He gave this a 9.

Its a great album and all but was it really deserving?

>i didn't get the cure or 9 inch nails, but here let me redeem myself with edginess

Yep!

Mediocre, not shit. But I mostly agree. They were way better after they broke up.

>9 inch nails
But he gave The Downward Spiral a 8.5/10

>pablo honey as good as kid a
why do you guys still fall for this scaruffi meme??? does giving lower scores than other publications make him cool or something?

this

Why does he lump band members' solo works with the main band as opposed to treating them as separate entities?

because he's a dumb Jewish dago who appeals to the lowest common denominator of contrarians

He rates albums based on how unique they are in the grand scheme of music. Higher rated albums tend to be albums that pushed the boundary to further limits. Lower rated albums are albums that are derivative or don't go against the grain very hard, but can still be good.

6 means good, but polarizing. I don't see the problem to be honest.

underrated

Yeah, it's not like rock has had many composers or performers on the level of art music, so it makes sense to prioritize stuff like that. If you're not a pop person, his top 10 list is very good.

Hmm. Yes. Kid A is basically some ramdon sounds and some noise with some riffs as background.

el dipy - no lo compren.youtube.com/watch?v=G7gTyuykRjI

...

Your right, Meddle should be the highest rated.

>the wall is higher than animals
>wywh is higher than animals and dsotm
>the final cut is higher than 0/10
"no"

lol beep booop look im so clever and groundbreaking i use electronic beep boop

ok computer is real talent retard

how can he call the compositions austere while also calling them overlong and irrational?

Well Super Coming adheres to a very strict same set of notes for most of its runtime, and it can feel pretty overlong. Same with Super Going.

The Final Cut is literally their most mature album, maybe if you ever grow up you'll be able to enjoy it.

9.5

a classic

I hate this guy but I agree with him in some things.

what the fuck

Someone needs to tell him using basic photoshop effects isn't good art

scaruffi.com/art/logos.html

I don't get this guy, he has a bunch of beatles songs in his favorite list from the 60s

He wasn't right when he chose to design his website with that late 90's educational page visual style in mind.

>ummagumma higher than dsotm, animals, the wall, ahm, wywh, div bell, meddle, and obc
>being this fucking retared
honestly thats just objectively stupid

it's just a meme, that's all

so what, he doesn't says they are a bad band, he says they are overrated, which is true.
And not only that, but also blames on the rock critics how they focus on money and sales and not on music and talent.

Well, music is subjective so caring about critics is stupid too.

"In 1969 the group released its most ambitious work, the double album titled Ummagumma (Harvest, 1969), which included a live recording of 4 elongated versions of the group's hallucinogenic/cosmic war horses, as well as a studio recording, subdivided into 4 parts, 1 for each musician. The live tracks were Astronomy Domine, Set The Controls For The Heart Of The Sun (a version that was more ceremonial, esoteric, Eastern, and cosmic), A Saucerful Of Secrets (a romantic version with a poignant hymn-like finale by Gilmour), and a thriller version of Careful With That Axe Eugene. This last track was a new classic, a thriller that pulled one subtly under an Eastern hypnotism, whispered supernaturally in an atmosphere of impending tragedy, and which was suddenly torn open by piercing screams, with blocks of music that just whiz by. Disintegrated, the track goes back to being soft and innocent, waiting for another victim. It was part embrace, part "trip", part nightmare, part delirium. The album recorded in the studio was austere and a bit pretentious; a theorization of the ideology of music of the quartet, each speaking from the angle of his own instrument. The 4 parts of the album were harmonic experiments executed in perfect freedom."

"If the albums of the trilogy of existential humanity only presented stereotypes, the double album The Wall condensed the meditation and commercialization of a decade into an unoriginal philosophy of "walls" which separate the two things. This album, ready to assimilate to the novelty of the music world - to disco rhythm such as the discrete music of Brian Eno, was the true reflection of Pink Floyd, always able to interpret the latest style. Wall signaled the point of max cohesion to be reached by the academic-commercial sound of the group: everyday noise in the background assayed and restored, sound segments that mixed mantras and the music of Ligeti, chromatically descriptive, the monolithic architecture of cotton candy. Symptomatic of the 3 parts of this melodrama of funk were tracks like Another Brick In The Wall (more like Comfortably Numb, which was the fourth) with choirs of school children. It was also the self-celebrating album for Waters, who since 1973 had led the group and was the author always credited on the cover. His songs, which were the softest and most dream-like, were recorded being sung in a dramatic and solemn manner that resembled the crooning a' la Broadway musicals or the metaphysical ballads by Genesis, recalling the disorder of the previous 2 albums, demonstrated by the insanity of Barrett who still tormented the souls of his companions. The alienation, the paranoia, and the nervousness which afflicted the nightmares of Barrett permeated into the private story of Waters, who was immersed in a series of devastating nightmares echoing in the emptiness."

What instrument does he play again?

"The interludes among the major tracks contain brief instrumental pieces or semi-acoustic sing-songs, often with noises inserted, which exacerbate the drama and pompousness of the work, to the point of being excessively morbid, if not apocalyptical. Redundant, smoky, full of special effects, and narcissistic, the music had no other way to display the paranoia of Waters, and tried its best in the expressionist psychodrama of the finale: In The Flesh, Waiting, Trial, which gradually moved towards the Brechtian style cabaret."

#OWNED

>Literally no better than a facebook atheist deep thinker
At least he comes from before those people

True, and yet it still sounds better than OKC

daa, tomatela

the part that really catches me off guard is this sentence
>The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest.
how is it not true that the Beatles sold the most albums?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_music_artists

it hurts to see those names

>gayness and blackness
>about 1 or 2 points
Then why did they add 4 to Blond?

Hail to the Thief is at least a 6

well it's a second language
i personally think his descriptions of music and why they're good or bad are very well written.

+1 lgbt
+1 black
+2 famous artist

lana del rey - ultraviolence

>times scaruffi was right

never

average brit pop

every single time, no exceptions

What is up with Scruffy and all those 6 or 6.5? It's like he's terrified of grading too high, which is reasonable. But he's also terrified of grading too low.

>Hail to the thief
>5/10

>In Rainbows
>5/10

>FUCKING OK COMPUTER
>7/10

all of those should be bumped 2 points and amnesiac bumped down 1 point.

...

>atom heart mother not the best album there
OPINION DROPPED

Bon Iver & Sleep

He gave that twenty one pilots album a 6.5 so he's cool in my book

Yeh Scaruffi's 7s aren't the same as Fandango's or P4K's though

lmao-ing at how stupid this person must be. ask those under 18's to name another Lennon song. They probably don't even know Woman or Instant Karma. And ask them if they've ever heard Band on the Run, uncle albert, and live and let die. even Rihanna qualifies him as more relevant than lennon ever was

Literally anyone with a philosophy is a philosopher though

He also rates based on how a fan would like it, if the album differs in any major way in a good way he'll give it a 6. If it's identical to previous ones he'll give it a 5. If it's boring to him in that it's got nothing unique going for it at all, it's a 4.

>if the album differs in any major way in a good way he'll give it a 6

What do you mean, like the previous album is a 5 and the next is a 6? If he rates it higher it means it's doing something different than the last in an outwards direction from the norm.

> If it's identical to previous ones he'll give it a 5

Because it's not pushing anymore, it's the same. If it differs, but is still good, then he rates it the same. For instance all of A Minor Forest's releases he rates a 6/10, but Flemish Altruism and Inindepdendence are wildly different albums.

>If it's boring to him in that it's got nothing unique going for it at all, it's a 4.
>nothing unique

Exactly.

ump

Fuck that pic, it's from some video I watched years ago, anyone got a link

He's never said Wings are bad

Got any proof to back your statement up?

>OK Computer deserving a 9
Radiohead fans truly are delusional.

he don'd love radio head and beadle please kill him mommy:-(

This only proves that he is no better.
He claims that in order to value true quality, you have to look beyond popularity, but he himself does exactly NOT do that when he thinks that the reason Beatles are the greatest band is because of their popularity.
Mass appeal doesn't mean you can't have an insane amount of artistic integrety.
Often it does, but it wasn't the case with the Beatles.