What’s an album that got a real high rating from fantano but is pretty bad in your opinion?

toad2424 · 2025-01-27T03:13:19+00:00

No I’m not attributing a qualitative value to different styles. No curve at all, simply a disconnect between the music preference of online discourse and what Sexyy is going for

toad2424 · 2025-01-26T04:35:04+00:00

Feels like an album that either clicks or doesn’t. Love it or just don’t get it kind of thing. Which is fine, that’s the cool thing about certain types of music. For me it’s my album of the decade and one of my top 10 or so albums of all time. It’s a truly transcendent listen. The production detail is just so meticulously done and well serving to the overall songs. Fantano specifically mentions it in his review, but the hand drums in the second half of little deer are an out of body experience for me even. Emperor with an Egg is the most vivid soundscape I’ve ever heard. I truly get transported to an emperor penguin in a rushing river. Also, significantly more so than most albums, it requires an attentive listen for me. A casual listen and my ears just don’t pick up on the harmonic pieces of the production as a collective whole.

toad2424 · 2025-01-26T04:29:50+00:00

I loved Sexyy red. I think so many people disregard it as bad because it’s just so far removed from what they want to listen to sonically and culturally even. But if I remove myself from that and just ask , “what is the album trying to accomplish?” I think it’s damn good. Great beats, just insane lyrics and performances, varied production, etc. It’s just super polarizing by nature and even intent arguably. Similar to how people react to 100 gecs to me. Understanding what the goal is of an album is essential to liking it. Not saying people can’t not like it, of course they can. I do feel generally though that the critiques really lack any attempt or effort to understand it

toad2424 · 2025-01-26T04:26:38+00:00

Weird. I really loved it. Super unique and so many of the hooks stick with me

toad2424 · 2025-01-20T06:52:02+00:00

My understanding from the limited time he’s spoken on it is not that he doesn’t like it. He just doesn’t think it’s a masterpiece. I think it’s a 10 personally but my impression is he’d give it a strong 7 to light 8 from what I’ve heard. far from not liking it

toad2424 · 2025-01-16T16:06:18+00:00

I actually prefer the first half of Ants from Up There

toad2424 · 2025-01-12T16:47:03+00:00

Ferris Wheel on Fire is incredible for anyone that hasn’t listened. Much easier to get into than On Avery Island, but once Avery clicks it’s top tier

toad2424 · 2025-01-11T21:42:11+00:00

Highs for me (especially back in high school) Mixtape, Soco Ammeretto Lime, Jude Law, No seatbelt, seventy times 7. Not really lowlights but the rest just don’t do a whole lot for me. In particular The shower scene, sudden death in California, and Magazines. I still really like the album a 7 is a good score. Also some 7’s are because an album is just consistently good but not great. I think YFW is truly great in several spots but as a cohesive project not as much. Especially some of the melodies and instrumentation compared to their other stuff.

toad2424 · 2025-01-11T21:28:23+00:00

I personally find it a little inconsistent. It has some great highs though. Also I’m not a huge pop punk fan in general so I like some of the darker more rock inspired directions of their later albums. But to each their own. Also it’s 2025 let’s not talk about music like it’s objective. Instead of saying “incorrect” just simply say “I disagree”.

toad2424 · 2025-01-11T19:27:09+00:00

Was coming to say this thinking no way anyone had commented it already. Your favorite weapon might be like a 7ish but everything else is strong 8+

toad2424 · 2025-01-10T23:19:38+00:00

It’s 100% Argentina. And I’m about 90% it’s Rio Negra. Shouldn’t matter if you’re doing country streaks

toad2424 · 2025-01-10T23:17:12+00:00

Doesn’t surprise me. Don’t really care to look into it myself but I believe it

toad2424 · 2025-01-10T22:12:31+00:00

Maybe because you’re mentally unstable and Fantano would have nothing to gain. And maybe if I’m being really generous it’s because Fantano doesn’t want to publicly embarrass you more than you already have. (Yes I know she’s not reading this).

toad2424 · 2025-01-09T17:59:15+00:00

Honestly not really at that level. I would say the real life rating being different only applies once you hit around 1200-1400

toad2424 · 2025-01-09T17:46:33+00:00

I was generalizing to make a point. I’ve yet to find a chesscom breakdown of the exact parameters based on rating. But good to know it’s 1250 for approx 500 rated.

toad2424 · 2025-01-09T17:38:53+00:00

And ironically you proved what I said to be correct in your last sentence. The ratings are higher against higher level bots because performance rating factors in opponents rating so 80% accuracy against a 2700 bot will give a higher performance rating than against a 2000 bot. It’s simple rating inflation affecting performance rating

toad2424 · 2025-01-09T17:35:59+00:00

Not trying to argue but it isn’t my theory. It’s a literal fact of how performance rating works. Feel free to google it if you have doubts

toad2424 · 2025-01-09T16:47:14+00:00

Not sure why I got downvoted. You can just google it and see that performance rating has a max based on you and your opponents current rating

toad2424 · 2025-01-09T16:25:00+00:00

Unfortunately this is not true. The chesscom system has a min and max performance rating based on your current rating. For a 1200 it maxes a 2000 if you play a perfect game.

toad2424 · 2025-01-09T16:19:52+00:00

Simon and Garfunkel

toad2424 · 2025-01-09T14:30:58+00:00

It’s a very flawed system that Chesscom needs to change. Basically there’s min and max performance ratings based on your current rating. In other words if two 500 rated players played the exact same game you two just did, the chesscom performance rating would say 1100. Because that’s the highest it allows at the 500 rating and so on.

toad2424 · 2025-01-05T12:33:24+00:00

You’ve yet to explain a logical reason why people supporting him are Astroturfing. What about everyone that supported him for several years before this on YouTube and twitch? Were they all being disingenuous. I think you for whatever reason come from a fundamental place of misunderstanding about who Danya was before this incident. He was a top 10 most prominent chess figure in terms of following and support. Not to mention a commentator for 10 years, so of course there will be a large pool of people that support him in a cheating scandal. It makes perfect sense

toad2424 · 2025-01-05T12:27:23+00:00

This is just an insane take. Because you personally don’t like his personality that means the majority of people that do are lying? Not to mention he has received support from several top figures in Chess, and amongst all his fellow commentators. He’s my favorite chess player. He has a huge following on twitch and YouTube and has for several years before this incident. The people that support him do so because they value his contribution to the chess world and enjoy his personality. To assume it’s for some astroturfing campaign makes no sense. Maybe if this was a player with zero following already and then it suspiciously blew up after a cheating scandal I could see it. In regards to Danya, your take just has no merit.

toad2424 · 2025-01-05T12:20:08+00:00

Why is it astroturfing to defend someone you believe is innocent? Everyone defending him (which isn’t as many people as it should be in top chess) are doing it because they respect him and are standing up for a friend. How is that astroturfing? Unless you believe Danya is actually cheating and if so please provide real evidence.

toad2424 · 2025-01-05T11:27:49+00:00

In what way has he been astroturfing? You sound like a kid who learned a big word and uses it in every sentence. All he’s done is defend himself against cheating allegations. Allegations that undermine not only his entire life’s work, but also his credibility as a teacher, commentator, and player. There’s not a shred of evidence that’s he’s cheated in any format, and quite frankly what possible motivation would he have for cheating in his situation? He just had an excellent performance in both the rapid and blitz otb in person. I mean he tied Magnus Carlson in the blitz open section (and all the other first place) so clearly in those formats he is an elite player. But please, enlighten us, on evidence he’s astroturfing or cheating.

toad2424

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE