Music snobs

Malice

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

Well of course it's opinion! Has anyone else actually looked at the title and opening post of this topic?

If you agree that it is in fact opinion and not fact then why did you bother with this post?

Riddle101

RGDATA! wrote: »

pointless and totally snobby aside - wtf is Nickelback doing on a list with The Who, Stones, Sabbath, AC/DC etc.
I completely and utterly fail to understand how you can get bands like this and not see Nickelback for the steaming pile of ****e they are. The sound of mediocrity with a ball of cash thrown at it.
Each to their own and all but...

Yeah I get a lot of slack about liking Nickelback:). I just find them to be an alternative to music that I heavily assoicate myself with, and I don't generally dislike them either, even if they might lack substanance, or are mediocre.

Bassboxxx

I'm defo a music snob...

I've noticed I've had less and less time for some music the more popular it got:cool:

TonyM.

Riddle101 wrote: »

I would have to say I'm a bit of a music snob. The thing is, my favourite bands are comprised of this
Metallica, Guns N' Roses, Motley Crue, Aerosmith, Queen, Iron Maiden, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, The Beatles, Black Sabbath, Ozzy Osbourne, AC/DC, The Rolling Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Pearl Jam, Deep Purple, Radiohead, Stone Sour, Foo Fighters, KISS, Slipknot, Creed, Nirvana, The Offspring, Sixx AM, Black Label Society, Nickelback, The Police, Oasis , The Clash, Velvet Revolver, Tenacious D

you should check out "Camp Freddy" all your bands rolled into one ,some good live music on youtube.

honru

When I was younger I used to have stupid criteria for basing whether I liked a band/song or not, things like if the band got a positive critical reception or were considered "cool".

Nowadays if I like a song, I like a song. I also tend to focus mostly on acts I do like as opposed to acts I don't like. There are plenty of acts out there that I'm not crazy about, such as Limp Bizkit or Paramore or something, but I'm not afraid to say I like one or two of their songs and at least give them that.

Oasis_Dublin

Malice_ wrote: »

If you agree that it is in fact opinion and not fact then why did you bother with this post?

Oh dear.

Riddle101

[QUOTE=TonyM.;69309048I would have to say I'm a bit of a music snob. The thing is, my favourite bands are comprised of this
Metallica, Guns N' Roses, Motley Crue, Aerosmith, Queen, Iron Maiden, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, The Beatles, Black Sabbath, Ozzy Osbourne, AC/DC, The Rolling Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Pearl Jam, Deep Purple, Radiohead, Stone Sour, Foo Fighters, KISS, Slipknot, Creed, Nirvana, The Offspring, Sixx AM, Black Label Society, Nickelback, The Police, Oasis , The Clash, Velvet Revolver, Tenacious D

you should check out "Camp Freddy" all your bands rolled into one ,some good live music on youtube.[/QUOTE]

I'll give them a look see, thanks

Nailz

I myself would say I'm definitely a music snob, I listen to all music I can manage to get my hands on, a very eclectic range at that, I don't base my opinion on ones popularity necessarily, but on what I hear, which is what it's all about, despite the fact that the vast majority of artists I like tend not to be mainstream or very popular, that's why I believe a lot of radio-music listeners aren't really music fans per-say, it's only music made to sell for the masses.

Albeit it, even if I don't like an artist, I will still listen to their new work for the sake of open-mindedness, nor does it mean I will automatically dislike the new work, in fact, on numerous occasions I've found albums from the artists in that personal niche which were very good. Although, I base my snobbiness on how far off the mainstream my tastes go, Avant Garde, Kecak and multiple other sections of the International traditional music genres. But the largest part goes to where I live, the far east of Cavan, practically Monaghan border, most people here, bar a few, are musically retarded.

Riddle101 wrote: »

I would have to say I'm a bit of a music snob. The thing is, my favourite bands are comprised of this
Metallica, Guns N' Roses, Motley Crue, Aerosmith, Queen, Iron Maiden, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, The Beatles, Black Sabbath, Ozzy Osbourne, AC/DC, The Rolling Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Pearl Jam, Deep Purple, Radiohead, Stone Sour, Foo Fighters, KISS, Slipknot, Creed, Nirvana, The Offspring, Sixx AM, Black Label Society

Even though I do like the work of about half those bands, they're too common to part of a music snobs criteria. So congratulations, you're not a music snob.



See what I mean...

Riddle101

Nailz wrote: »

I myself would say I'm definitely a music snob, I listen to all music I can manage to get my hands on, a very eclectic range at that, I don't base my opinion on ones popularity necessarily, but on what I hear, which is what it's all about, despite the fact that the vast majority of artists I like tend not to be mainstream or very popular, that's why I believe a lot of radio-music listeners aren't really music fans per-say, it's only music made to sell for the masses.

Albeit it, even if I don't like an artist, I will still listen to their new work for the sake of open-mindedness, nor does it mean I will automatically dislike the new work, in fact, on numerous occasions I've found albums from the artists in that personal niche which were very good. Although, I base my snobbiness on how far off the mainstream my tastes go, Avant Garde, Kecak and multiple other sections of the International traditional music genres. But the largest part goes to where I live, the far east of Cavan, practically Monaghan border, most people here, bar a few, are musically retarded.

Even though I do like the work of about half those bands, they're too common to part of a music snobs criteria. So congratulations, you're not a music snob.



See what I mean...

I take your point, I would have defined myself as a music snob on the basis of how I feel about my music compared to that of someone elses who I might not like. Believing mine to be better, although maybe Nickelback might be overreactive or even some others on my list, and maybe I come off as a bit of a c*nt saying this. But let's say for instance I meet someone who is really in love with all the type of music you see in the charts nowadays, such as Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber, Katy Perry or even Jedward. I tend to laugh at them, thinking how could you like these guys? Same with people who like Kanye West or NDubz etc

lordgoat

Riddle101 wrote: »

I take your point, I would have defined myself as a music snob on the basis of how I feel about my music compared to that of someone elses who I might not like. Believing mine to be better, although maybe Nickelback might be overreactive or even some others on my list, and maybe I come off as a bit of a c*nt saying this. But let's say for instance I meet someone who is really in love with all the type of music you see in the charts nowadays, such as Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber, Katy Perry or even Jedward. I tend to laugh at them, thinking how could you like these guys? Same with people who like Kanye West or NDubz etc

See I have a problem with the dismissive attitude to pop music. While it's never on my radio, i think it's important to be able to give credit to the very few pop acts that craft a good pop song. I don't mean the manufactured xfactor swill. But dismissing Gaga, Kanye, Beyonce like this is harsh. Writing a pop hit is still one of the most difficult things to do and despite what a lot of bands say the vast majority still would love to be number 1 on TOTP.

Also i know ratings are no true gauge but Kanye's latest got a perffect 10.0 on pitchfork the snootisiest indie website out there (well it was).

Pitchfork is painfully hip and drearily pretentious, the articles are akin to drawn out asphyxiation, never understood why many musos would revere it as the testament of approval. Still it's a measurable improvement on slick manufactured pop (Glee, X-Factor etc) where grandiose marketing in the form of stylised racy videos and breathless promotion sets the heart aflutter and the money on the counter :pac:

lordgoat

Deleted User wrote: »

Pitchfork is painfully hip and drearily pretentious, the articles are akin to drawn out asphyxiation, never understood why many musos would revere it as the testament of approval. Still it's a measurable improvement on slick manufactured pop (Glee, X-Factor etc) where grandiose marketing in the form of stylised racy videos and breathless promotion sets the heart aflutter and the money on the counter :pac:

Again to label all of pitchfork like that is a bit incorrect. It is a massive resource and you can find out pretty much everything that's released on there. I mainly use it to find out what's new and if i see something that might be half decent i give it a spin. They are also fantastic for interviews and odd collaborations...

Some of the reviewers are terrible but there are some better than decent ones on it. Nothing worse than HotPress or NME and many a damn sight better.

I don't like the scoring system but it's part of their signature now so i can see why it persists.

Howard the Duck

I see this thread is full of music snobs! who would have thunk it. I used to be a music snob but i got feed up with people thinking i'm a dick. Now they have to get to know my real personality to find out i'm a dick.
I still am a music snob but i just keep my snobbish opinions to myself now.

Riddle101

lordgoat wrote: »

See I have a problem with the dismissive attitude to pop music. While it's never on my radio, i think it's important to be able to give credit to the very few pop acts that craft a good pop song. I don't mean the manufactured xfactor swill. But dismissing Gaga, Kanye, Beyonce like this is harsh. Writing a pop hit is still one of the most difficult things to do and despite what a lot of bands say the vast majority still would love to be number 1 on TOTP.

Also i know ratings are no true gauge but Kanye's latest got a perffect 10.0 on pitchfork the snootisiest indie website out there (well it was).

Well I won't say all pop music is bad, or hip hop. It would be wrong to, but the variety of artists today, just don't please me. Kanye West? meh, i prefer something more old school like Dr Dre, Tupac and Xzibit. As for pop, i have tremendus respect for artists like Micheal Jackson or Prince. Course there are plenty of other artists I could list but I go back to an earlier post of mine about music of this era, and how it just grits my teeth.

Kold

Howard the Duck wrote: »

I see this thread is full of music snobs! who would have thunk it. I used to be a music snob but i got feed up with people thinking i'm a dick. Now they have to get to know my real personality to find out i'm a dick.
I still am a music snob but i just keep my snobbish opinions to myself now.

Ha it's kinda funny when you realise how much of a dick you sound though so you try to rein it in and then someone states a horrific opinion about some terribad song and you try not to say anything but they can see it in your face and think you're a dick anyway.

Kold

lordgoat wrote: »

See I have a problem with the dismissive attitude to pop music. While it's never on my radio, i think it's important to be able to give credit to the very few pop acts that craft a good pop song. I don't mean the manufactured xfactor swill. But dismissing Gaga, Kanye, Beyonce like this is harsh. Writing a pop hit is still one of the most difficult things to do and despite what a lot of bands say the vast majority still would love to be number 1 on TOTP.

Also i know ratings are no true gauge but Kanye's latest got a perffect 10.0 on pitchfork the snootisiest indie website out there (well it was).

I regard Pop music as 'kitsch' which as an artist I have to believe is the enemy of real art. It's a formulaic simulation. It's an imitation of other music with none of the artistry.

Kid V

Think i used to be a pretty bad snob but i've forced myself to get better and i've embraced my guilty pleasures so much so that i'm not guilty anymore. Sigur Rós and the Sugababes happily coexist on my ipod.

You can never truly slay the snob inside though. I cant help rolling my eyes when someone puts on crap music at a party.

Rigsby

Kold wrote: »

I regard Pop music as 'kitsch' which as an artist I have to believe is the enemy of real art. It's a formulaic simulation. It's an imitation of other music with none of the artistry.

"Real art" is in the eye (ear) of the beholder.

That's the beauty of music..it is so personal.

Setun

lordgoat wrote: »

Writing a pop hit is still one of the most difficult things to do and despite what a lot of bands say the vast majority still would love to be number 1 on TOTP.

To say the obvious about the charts: it's generally about hype generation, and has been for a couple of decades - if Lady Gaga etc releases a new single, it will get in the top 5, if not number 1, in the download charts because of the level of anticipation drummed up by the record label and the media. Never mind if the record was accidentally released without the vocal track, if it's completely atonal, if it's badly produced, or even if she goes all Stockhausen and does something royally nuts with a string quartet and a couple of helicopters, it will do well in the charts. Pop musicians are icons - their celebrity is a greater selling point than their ability to produce music, and I find it difficult to enjoy their music with that in mind. I can appreciate Lady Gaga's ability to distort expectation and write a catchy tune, but as of yet she hasn't released anything that I would have a place for in my music collection.

So maybe I'm a snob? Probably but perhaps not consciously - it's also a question of aesthetics and subconscious preference. Whatever formula they've crowd-sourced that results in The Ultimate Pop Song In The Year 2010 simply grates in my mind and does not produce any satisfactory auditory sensations, and to a large extent, this is out of my control - perhaps like people prefer certain foods over others without quite being able to articulate exactly why.

Kold wrote:

I regard Pop music as 'kitsch' which as an artist I have to believe is the enemy of real art. It's a formulaic simulation. It's an imitation of other music with none of the artistry.

While it sounds pretentious to say the above, I completely agree with it. But I suppose it's necessary to define pop music as being music made with the end-goal of selling by pandering to a general consensus, rather than a record that is released without chart-topping in mind and subsequently becomes popular. It could be speculated that some time in the last 30 years this paradigm changed from the latter to the former.

Oasis_Dublin

Kid V wrote: »

You can never truly slay the snob inside though. I cant help rolling my eyes when someone puts on crap music at a party.

I know someone like you. The worst kind of person:rolleyes:

Oasis_Dublin

magma69 wrote: »

Maybe you should check the meaning of a music snob. Someone who looks down on others who don't share the same musical tastes as their own. i.e. You

In your warped mind, Magma69 prefers the later era of Radiohead and I prefer the earlier era therefore Magma69 is a music snob. :pac::pac::pac:

I listen to music because I like it. I don't go around in "Oasis are better than anyone else" t-shirts. If I'm asked my opinion on music I give it! Music snobs are snobs because they dislike music that becomes popular. That would be my interpretation of it anyway. I suppose that's the problem with it, I know what it means and you don't :cool:

diamondtooth

I hate music snobs. What makes one person an authority on music over another person. Its stupid the way some rock music fans look down on pop music and some classical music fans look down on everything else.

I think a bad song hasn't been made yet. If someone somewhere enjoys a song then it has done its job. After that its down to personal opinion.

Listen to and enjoy whatever you like I say.

Dudess

Some people here are referring to themselves as music snobs, and I can't see how they are. To me, a music snob is someone who secretly likes something but won't admit it or will pretend to themselves and others that they don't like it because it doesn't fit in with their predominant taste, it's too popular, it's not "cool" etc.
Disliking something because you simply dislike how it sounds though is not snobbery. The fact that it might be "uncool", very mainstream etc is often of no relevance - you can't help what you dislike the sound of. I hate Use Somebody by Kings of Leon - I just think it's an awful dreary song. No doubt some folks will view that as snobbery because it's one of the first songs that brought KOL into the mainstream - but honestly, I just really dislike the song. The fact it's a more mainstream KOL means jack-sh1t to me.
Now if I actually liked it but pretended to dislike it because they've become mainstream, then that would be music snobbery. And on the other hand, I really like their latest single, and they've never been bigger. But what I've heard of their newer stuff, I'm not pushed - their earlier stuff was more gritty and bluesy, now they're U2 lite. That earlier sound is more appealing to me in general - it's just a sound I prefer.
A lot of people started to dismiss Arcade Fire when they got huge, whereas I actually think their second album is better than their first. To be fair, some people may have been of the opinion that their sound deteriorated as they got bigger, but I'd put a bet on it that others simply resented them being no longer cult and indie. I know it's subjective but I really can't see how their sound has deteriorated - or even changed.
But a deterioration in a band's quality could coincide with them becoming more commercially successful - and it's often no coincidence - and a person has every right to dislike the new sound if it's not appealing to them. Take Simple Minds for instance - their pre stadium rock anthems sound was far better (in my opinion) than the stuff they're better known for. They possibly compromised that to make more money, and that's their choice. But I won't apologise for preferring their earlier stuff - I think it's better, it's got fuk all to do with their later sound being more successful. And I still like a number of their later songs. If I like a song, I like a song - if it's by Katy Perry, Black Eyed Peas, Lady GaGa, so be it. And I do like a number of songs by them.
My other definition of a music snob would be...

Rigsby wrote: »

IMO, what makes a snob is when a person belittles or dismisses another person's music. On the other hand, if someone genuinely loves any type music, then they wont give a f--k, or be bothered as to what anyone else says or thinks about it.

Spot-on. And using that criteria, a person who dislikes anything kinda avant-garde simply because they feel it's for people who are up their own arses... is also a music snob.

zimovain wrote: »

I prefer the early stuff!

Could be someone being snobbish, but could also be a genuine preference - a lot of artists do seem to deteriorate with time.

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

The Bends (especially) and Pablo Honey are 2 of my 4 favourite Radiohead albums. I'm forming an opinion based on personal experience. I dare say it's the most practical way to conduct a discussion based purely on people's opinions.

Oh right, so because YOU prefer the earlier Radiohead, then it's the "right" Radiohead to like?

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

Well of course it's opinion! Has anyone else actually looked at the title and opening post of this topic?

You said it was a "FACT".
You very much seem to force your opinions on people and dismiss and belittle those of others, and make assumptions as to why they don't like something, but it's ok for you to dislike particular acts - and you call others the music snobs?

DublinWriter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kaOGsC1S1s

PMI

I meet them all the time but I try to explain my side, I listen/learn from all styles of music from pop new production techniques to old school just great songs.

I dont think music has room for snobs, as most snobs tend to be watching/judging the artist/musician rather than doing anything creative themselves

I think you can learn from all musicians and styles no matter what genre/stage they are at, maybe this is why I make my living totally from music ?!?

Knowledge is power

eiresurfer

I used to dislike musical snobs until I became one myself.

Well...not quite. I wouldn't consider myself a snob about music, but other people (friends & girlfriend) have said I am snob about music - and I generally don't bother arguing because if that's the perception they have then so be it, even though it's I don't think it's true.

Why one might think I am a snob:
I am the type of person that would moan/raises eyes to heaven if a person put on (say) Black Eyed Peas at a party. But, that's only cos I hate that type of music.
I say things like: "I saw Kings of Leon first ever European gig in Glastonbury. Their first album was class, but christ are they rubbish now". Again, I say this because, in my opinion, I think it's true.
I listen to a LOT of "obscure" music. However, what some people consider obscure, I actually consider completely mainstream. e.g. I always assumed Sigur Ros have been "mainstream" for years, until I mentioned them to a few workmates after an Olympia gig, and none of them had heard of the band. Thereby not helping my "music snob" reputation. As I said, it all comes down to perception.

So why do I don't think I'm a snob:
I love Coldplay's first two albums.
I like Enya's music.
I will listen to anything if I think it's good.

eiresurfer

Another thing to remember is that if a band has a small amount of fans, and then that band enjoy massive success, it's difficult for the original fans not to get annoyed. And it's easy to see why: in the past the band was signing your CD after a Whelan's gig, now you can't even see them in a festival field because the curvature of the earth is blocking your view. Hence, the "I preferred their older stuff" syndrome. Although, to be fair, in the vast majority of cases the "older stuff" IS better: Oasis, U2, KoL, Coldplay, Rolling Stones, this list could go on forever. Unfortunately, most musicians have a peak in their 20s, for any amount of reasons (drugs/money/desire), it's as simple as that.

Also, I firmly believe that the more music you listen to, the more you realise the amount of fantastic music there is out there that isn't on the radio. However, this is increasing the chance that people will preceive you as a snob. For example, on Spotify right now I am listening to Deerhunter, Epic45, Stereolab, The Wedding Present, Darwin Deez, Somadrone. I know - even listing these out makes me sound like a snob.

ntlbell

It's like most things for the majority it's an age thing.

When you develop some charecter and a half decent interesting personality you stop using things like music and fashion/movies/etc to define you. If you don't grow out of it you end up at 50 still desperatley trying to convince a graduate in the work canteen how sh|t music is today, while wearing some questionable attire.

I enjoy listening to people who truly appreciate music are willing to actually teach you something or point you to something rather than some twat who thinks everything i put in my ears is complete thrash because it sold more than 10 albums or got into the top 100 in the charts, these are not musical snobs, they're just complete w*nkers.

The former is a lot harder to come across while the latter are two to a penny.

Dudess

eiresurfer wrote: »

I used to dislike musical snobs until I became one myself.

Well...not quite. I wouldn't consider myself a snob about music, but other people (friends & girlfriend) have said I am snob about music - and I generally don't bother arguing because if that's the perception they have then so be it, even though it's I don't think it's true.

Why one might think I am a snob:
I am the type of person that would moan/raises eyes to heaven if a person put on (say) Black Eyed Peas at a party. But, that's only cos I hate that type of music.
I say things like: "I saw Kings of Leon first ever European gig in Glastonbury. Their first album was class, but christ are they rubbish now". Again, I say this because, in my opinion, I think it's true.
I listen to a LOT of "obscure" music. However, what some people consider obscure, I actually consider completely mainstream. e.g. I always assumed Sigur Ros have been "mainstream" for years, until I mentioned them to a few workmates after an Olympia gig, and none of them had heard of the band. Thereby not helping my "music snob" reputation. As I said, it all comes down to perception.

So why do I don't think I'm a snob:
I love Coldplay's first two albums.
I like Enya's music.
I will listen to anything if I think it's good.

eiresurfer wrote: »

Another thing to remember is that if a band has a small amount of fans, and then that band enjoy massive success, it's difficult for the original fans not to get annoyed. And it's easy to see why: in the past the band was signing your CD after a Whelan's gig, now you can't even see them in a festival field because the curvature of the earth is blocking your view. Hence, the "I preferred their older stuff" syndrome. Although, to be fair, in the vast majority of cases the "older stuff" IS better: Oasis, U2, KoL, Coldplay, Rolling Stones, this list could go on forever. Unfortunately, most musicians have a peak in their 20s, for any amount of reasons (drugs/money/desire), it's as simple as that.

Also, I firmly believe that the more music you listen to, the more you realise the amount of fantastic music there is out there that isn't on the radio. However, this is increasing the chance that people will preceive you as a snob. For example, on Spotify right now I am listening to Deerhunter, Epic45, Stereolab, The Wedding Present, Darwin Deez, Somadrone. I know - even listing these out makes me sound like a snob.

I don't think you should cave into the "People who only listen to alt stuff are musical snobs" mindset. You like who you like, don't like who you don't like. It's a flat-out refusal to think outside that box, and a dismissal/belittling (NOT a dislike - you're entitled to your opinion) of what other people are into that would make you a snob.

magma69

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

I listen to music because I like it. I don't go around in "Oasis are better than anyone else" t-shirts. If I'm asked my opinion on music I give it! Music snobs are snobs because they dislike music that becomes popular. That would be my interpretation of it anyway. I suppose that's the problem with it, I know what it means and you don't :cool:

And how did you deduce that "without a shadow of a doubt" I dislike music that becomes popular, from my single post?

So I am a music snob because I prefer 00's Radiohead to 90's Radiohead? If anyone is being the snob here it's you by resenting those who have a different opinion than you.

There's absolutely nothing in my post to suggest that. :pac::pac: