Music snobs

Oasis_Dublin · 02-12-2010 10:03pm

Dudess wrote: »

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

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?

Did I ever say it was the "right" Radiohead to like? No, of course I didn't so can you please not make up sh*t to suit your argument, thank you. "2 of my 4 favourite Radiohead albums..." The use of the word "my" cleary suggests opinion.

Thom Yorke has attempted to distance himself from Pablo Honey but it was far more simple sounding than some of their later work. Hence, my comment about it being music they made before they disappeared up their own arses.

I don't see how anyone could be stupid enough to think my "FACT" statement was anything other than an obvious dig at the 'music snob' brigade. I'll edit the comment to include an exclamation mark just for you!

I've based my opinions as to why other people like certain music purely based on my own personal experiences. I've avoided making outlandish sweeping statements like certain people on this thread have.

Dudess · 02-12-2010 10:03pm

I didn't make sh1t up to suit my argument at all - you blatantly said people who prefer post OK Computer Radiohead are music snobs, they must be just being pretentious of course, nothing to do with the fact that they might just... prefer the different sound? You have resorted to borderline personal abuse and being snide a number of times simply because of people not sharing your opinion - and your post above is no exception. You shouldn't get so upset when people disagree with you. And the "FACT" jibe was not obvious seeing as it fits in with other stuff you've been writing. You dismiss people who aren't fans of Oasis as music snobs, simply because they dislike Oasis - yeah sure, of course it's because they're music snobs, not because they genuinely think Oasis post Morning Glory is dreary and turgid as fuk...

DublinWriter wrote: »

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

Lol - from the most indie band ever!

Oasis_Dublin · 02-12-2010 10:11pm

magma69 wrote: »

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

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

That is some fantastic misquoting of my use of "without a doubt", I have to say! I took a stab in the dark there I have to say but prove me wrong, throw up your last FM account there and lets see all the popular music you have at the top of your list!

"So I am a music snob because I prefer 00's Radiohead to 90's Radiohead?" I think that is where I got the idea from. If I am misunderstanding one of the words in this sentence, please do tell me.

karaokeman · 02-12-2010 11:34pm

I usually refer to music snobs as these kind of people.

"Hey do you like Muse"

"Yeah I do, they're class"

"Name Five of their songs"

Then that person does not consider you a fan just because you name 5 songs and you only name recent chart hits.

honru · 03-12-2010 12:50am

Dudess wrote: »

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.

I can willingly hold my hand up and say I lost interest in Arcade Fire after their first album/when I first saw them live, and there was definitely a bit of resentment for them becoming more popular. Then again I guess my taste just changed as I find myself less interested in these kinds of bands nowadays.

I usually refer to music snobs as these kind of people.

"Hey do you like Muse"

"Yeah I do, they're class"

"Name Five of their songs"

Then that person does not consider you a fan just because you name 5 songs and you only name recent chart hits.

Sounds more like an arrogant douchebag than a snob tbh.

furiousox · 03-12-2010 12:57am

I'm not a snob I just have great taste in music.

lordgoat · 03-12-2010 1:52pm

f®eak s©enery wrote: »

I can willingly hold my hand up and say I lost interest in Arcade Fire after their first album/when I first saw them live, and there was definitely a bit of resentment for them becoming more popular. Then again I guess my taste just changed as I find myself less interested in these kinds of bands nowadays.

Sounds more like an arrogant douchebag than a snob tbh.

Really good points being made in here, hopefully i'll get tim to reply properly over the weekend.

I'm in the same category as above RE the Arcade Fire and have been labelled snobbish for saying i think very little of their second album it's bland to me.

The first i loved. One of the few albums that got me excited when listening to it for the second time.

Their newest is also damn fine record, and imo much better than the second. So i guess i'm un-snobbish again or more snobbish... who knows...

Kold · 03-12-2010 4:14pm

I think each album has had it's merits. I thought Neon Bible had a lot going on for it.

lordgoat · 03-12-2010 4:34pm

Kold wrote: »

I think each album has had it's merits. I thought Neon Bible had a lot going on for it.

Again I'd agree completely with this. For me though I found alot more of those mertis on their other albums. Doesn't make it a bad album, i just prefer the other two.

Have you seen them live Kold?

Kold · 03-12-2010 4:39pm

No, but I would have loved to. Unfortunately with my finances as is, there are only a few gigs that I'd pay 40+ for.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 03-12-2010 6:41pm

To me a "music snob" is not defined by what music they listen to, but by their attitude to those people who don't share their taste.

I listen to a very wide range of bands/singers, some of it probably quite "trendy" some of it more "commercial". I don't judge others by what they listen to, or their ignorance to anything outside the charts. I don't listen to it much myself, but each to their own and all that.

I have no time for people who use musical taste to exclude people, or to make others feel small or "less cool"

The way I see it, some people use music for having on in the background, or entertaining them in the car. Beyond that they've no interest in it. These people do tend to be listening to The Black Eyed Peas or Cheryl Cole and the likes. Others have more interest in the music, are more invested in it, and therefore have wider ranging tastes. It's all good.

I have to say though music snobs exist on both ends of the spectrum. I was listening to Arcade Fire in the car one day and had my friends make all sorts of comments about it until I turned it off and they put on Lady Gaga. It works both ways, but we'd probably all be much happier if we just accepted each other's tastes and got on with it.

KrazeeEyezKilla · 03-12-2010 7:40pm

When a band has a fairly small cult fanbase than all you'll ever hear about them is positive. It's only when they make a breakthrough that more people get exposed to them leading to the increased negativity. I used to hear about what a great band Paramore were 4-5 years ago. I didn't care at the time and it was only when they made the mainstream that I realised how dull they were.

A lot of music fans can only get into a band if it has classic staus and unanimous critical approval. It's the reason why you hear people being so dismissive about modern music. It's easier for these people to only like stuff like Public Enemy or Jimi Hendrix which everyone knows is great than be into something that might leave them embarrased in a few years time.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 03-12-2010 8:10pm

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote: »

When a band has a fairly small cult fanbase than all you'll ever hear about them is positive. It's only when they make a breakthrough that more people get exposed to them leading to the increased negativity.

Exactly.

A fairly small band could have a song that only their fans know and love. Then it gets picked up by a TV show, or ad campaign, revealing it to a much wider audience. Then it's on the radio, maybe even in the charts. Suddenly this song isn't a good song anymore. How is that possible? It's the same song that you loved a few weeks ago.
I understand that people can get sick of a song because it's on the radio every time you switch it on, but that doesn't mean it stops being a good song, or the band are no longer a good band. It's crazy the way some people think.

lordgoat · 04-12-2010 3:06pm

Kold wrote: »

No, but I would have loved to. Unfortunately with my finances as is, there are only a few gigs that I'd pay 40+ for.

If you were knocking around dub on sun/mon you'd pick one up cheap. I gave away a bell and seb tick last night and wasn't the only one doing it

honru · 05-12-2010 1:57pm

lordgoat wrote:

I'm in the same category as above RE the Arcade Fire and have been labelled snobbish for saying i think very little of their second album it's bland to me.

The first i loved. One of the few albums that got me excited when listening to it for the second time.

Their newest is also damn fine record, and imo much better than the second. So i guess i'm un-snobbish again or more snobbish... who knows...

I may check out their newest album... didn't listen to Neon Bible.

What put me off Arcade Fire was their live show: they seemed to play musical chairs onstage for no particular reason. And I mean a lot of this switching around business. It was more than five years ago when I saw them so my memory is a little hazy... but I think most if not all of the members sat behind the drum kit for at least one song.

Now there could have been reasons for them changing instruments that I'm completely not aware of but to me it just reeked of pretentiousness and "oh, look at us!". On the other hand you have acts like Tortoise who do a lot of switching of instrumentation on stage, but the difference is each member is very proficient with whatever instrument they're playing, which is commendable as there is a bit more complexity to their music.

Kold · 05-12-2010 2:42pm

See that just spelt as showmanship to me. I've always thought they sounded good rather than amazing but I've seen clips of live shows and they look so full of energy and they look like they're having loads of fun and it draws the whole audience in. I don't understand the person shaking their head and wishing that they would just get on with covering their own songs. This is the reason that Darwin Deez was one of the best live acts I saw this year. Despite the ridiculous levels of hipster in the audience, the show on stage was fun as hell and they were interacting with us.

This 'pretentious' word is thrown around so much about music and I think 9 times out of 10 it's completely invalid and implies that a band takes innovation seriously. I mean pretentious is to think of yourself as being above people, I'd be more willing to direct this word at pop acts who go onstage, with these ridiculous light shows and dancers that don't really relate to anything in real life but they don't have to explain the set design, then they go and pretend they're singing with a fake DJ all dressed to the nines like a prostitute that we shall never actually see naked like some kind of forbidden fruit.

Like f*ck it, Arcade Fire are musicians, it's taken them years to create their sound and the music, they can play it how they feel is best.

The pop format is bizarre to me, I'm sitting there wondering what the back up dancers actually represent to the song.

Horse_box · 05-12-2010 3:01pm

I consider people who listen to Spin 103.8 tasteless folk who have a terrible taste in music. Therefore yes, I am a music snob

magma69 · 05-12-2010 5:56pm

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

That is some fantastic misquoting of my use of "without a doubt", I have to say!

:P Yeah, it's pretty good if I say so myself.

I took a stab in the dark there

I've avoided making outlandish sweeping statements like certain people on this thread have.

You're a man/woman of many contradictions

I

have to say but prove me wrong, throw up your last FM account there and lets see all the popular music you have at the top of your list!

I use grooveshark. Regardless I can tell you that there is some popular music I do like. Cee-Lo's "Forget You" was a huge pop hit and I enjoy it a lot so that rubbishes your theory. I also love Arcade Fire's number 1 album.

"So I am a music snob because I prefer 00's Radiohead to 90's Radiohead?" I think that is where I got the idea from. If I am misunderstanding one of the words in this sentence, please do tell me.

Again with contradicting yourself, you just admitted it was a stab in the dark and now your saying thats where you got the idea I was a music snob. Tell me how you got the idea then. :rolleyes:

Oasis_Dublin · 05-12-2010 6:28pm

magma69 wrote: »

You're a man/woman of many contradictions

I

I use grooveshark. Regardless I can tell you that there is some popular music I do like. Cee-Lo's "Forget You" was a huge pop hit and I enjoy it a lot so that rubbishes your theory. I also love Arcade Fire's number 1 album.

Again with contradicting yourself, you just admitted it was a stab in the dark and now your saying thats where you got the idea I was a music snob. Tell me how you got the idea then. :rolleyes:

One example of a pop song! I'm hardly having an epiphany here! Throw up your account there and let me see it sure. Which #1 Arcade Fire album do you love?

I took one guess which you have yet to prove me wrong about. My original argument in my first post read, music snobs are people who say that "Radiohead's best work has come about since Kid A." That was the whole premise of my argument. I based it upon what friends of mine act like once their favourite unknown artists becomes popular. Again this is my personal experience, not some silly generalisation. You then wrote that you "I prefer 00's Radiohead to 90's Radiohead." To break it down as simply as I can: Oasis_Dublin thinks that those who think that music made by Radiohead after Kid A is their best work are music snobs, magma69 likes Radiohead post Kid A, therefore magma69 is a music snob! Again, if there is something that I have missed, do explain.

I never said that you made sweeping generalisations, I was replying to Dudess when he claimed that "Oh right, so because YOU (Oasis_Dublin) prefer the earlier Radiohead, then it's the "right" Radiohead to like?"

Of course I can't prove you're a music snob but I can surely have an opinion on the matter (considering I know you so well!)

magma69 · 05-12-2010 6:36pm

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

One example of a pop song! I'm hardly having an epiphany here! Throw up your account there and let me see it sure. Which #1 Arcade Fire album do you love?

I took one guess which you have yet to prove me wrong about. My original argument in my first post read, music snobs are people who say that "Radiohead's best work has come about since Kid A." That was the whole premise of my argument. I based it upon what friends of mine act like once their favourite unknown artists becomes popular. Again this is my personal experience, not some silly generalisation. You then wrote that you "I prefer 00's Radiohead to 90's Radiohead." To break it down as simply as I can: Oasis_Dublin thinks that those who think that music made by Radiohead after Kid A is their best work are music snobs, magma69 likes Radiohead post Kid A, therefore magma69 is a music snob! Again, if there is something that I have missed, do explain.

I never said that you made sweeping generalisations, I was replying to Dudess when he claimed that "Oh right, so because YOU (Oasis_Dublin) prefer the earlier Radiohead, then it's the "right" Radiohead to like?"

Of course I can't prove you're a music snob but I can surely have an opinion on the matter (considering I know you so well!)

Your definition of a music snob is someone who dislikes popular music and I just gave an example of popular music that I like (Forget You and #1 album, The Suburbs) ergo, proving your accusations wrong. Now, I'm sick of making you look silly in this discussion so I'll leave you have the last word. Ciao.

Kold · 05-12-2010 6:52pm

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

My original argument in my first post read, music snobs are people who say that "Radiohead's best work has come about since Kid A." That was the whole premise of my argument. I based it upon what friends of mine act like once their favourite unknown artists becomes popular. Again this is my personal experience, not some silly generalisation.

It's both.

Oasis_Dublin · 05-12-2010 7:02pm

magma69 wrote: »

Your definition of a music snob is someone who dislikes popular music and I just gave an example of popular music that I like (Forget You and #1 album, The Suburbs) ergo, proving your accusations wrong. Now, I'm sick of making you look silly in this discussion so I'll leave you have the last word. Ciao.

Yeah that's my definition. I like Oasis but I don't think I'm a music snob. Why? Read what I actually wrote and you will be enlightened!

Oasis_Dublin · 05-12-2010 7:03pm

Kold wrote: »

It's both.

It's not.

Kold · 05-12-2010 7:31pm

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

It's not.

No it is, your personal experience contributes to you making a stupid generalisation. Your 'opinion' is based on absolute crap. Opinions aren't magic irrefutable things, if your opinion is that music snobs tend to prefer Radiohead's later work, your opinion is stupid.

Oasis_Dublin · 05-12-2010 7:47pm

Kold wrote: »

No it is, your personal experience contributes to you making a stupid generalisation. Your 'opinion' is based on absolute crap. Opinions aren't magic irrefutable things, if your opinion is that music snobs tend to prefer Radiohead's later work, your opinion is stupid.

"What is everyones thoughts on music snobs ? Are you one?

From my own experience i come across what i call music snobs a good bit because i hang around with a lot of musicians." Opening post.

I have based my "stupid generalisation" on experiences I have had. How else does any form an opinion? (other than some one telling them what to think) I have not generalised, I've called those people I know music snobs because they dislike early Radiohead because the music was "too simple" or "too generic" or because Creep became "too big", all moronic reasons to dislike a whole section of a band's career. It really is extremely simple. Not that I would expect you to understand that.

"The snobbery kicks in then when f*ckers whack on the Kings of Leon at a party though." - Music snobbery at its very best!

Kold · 05-12-2010 8:30pm

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

I have based my "stupid generalisation" on experiences I have had. How else does any form an opinion? (other than some one telling them what to think) I have not generalised, I've called those people I know music snobs because they dislike early Radiohead because the music was "too simple" or "too generic" or because Creep became "too big", all moronic reasons to dislike a whole section of a band's career. It really is extremely simple. Not that I would expect you to understand that.

You didn't say anything about disliking the early albums, you stated that people who had a preference for the albums after Kid A was a good hint that someone was a musical snob. If you can't see how this might be a flawed argument (and you're fighting for it tooth and nail so I'd imagine that's the case) I doubt there is much point dragging this issue on much further.
I love Radiohead, my favourite band. I think what really sets them apart from other groups is their integrity and dedication to producing good music. They embraced technology and other genres in order to help them make the best music they could. You stated that it was a fact that they'd disappeared up their own arses, whilst this may have been tongue in cheek, this just suggests to me that you refused to try and accept a different sound. That you like your traditional rock song and the fact that they moved beyond that makes you think they were pretentious. If pretentious is making the music you want to make then great. Of course I'm sure I'm completely wrong about this but if you want to refute it, make a new thread and I'll happily debate it there.

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

"The snobbery kicks in then when f*ckers whack on the Kings of Leon at a party though." - Music snobbery at its very best!

I never refuted that I was one, music is one of my biggest interests and whilst I have no real musical education, I do reckon I have a greater knowledge on contemporary music than most. But I reckon there are worse than me out there, I don't like belittling people so if the topic is on music, I'll try and talk about a common interest which is often viable due to the amount of types of music I listen to.

Now to go one step further, I would suggest that there is a maturing process to music appreciation. Hence why so many of us cringe at the music we used to listen to as teenagers. I used to think Tupac was the epitome of honest lyricism. Now I look at a lot of his lyrics as being pretty unsophisticated, but if you told me that then I'd have argued it until blue in the face. He still made some of the best songs about f*cking I've heard. But Kings of Leon, sh*t's just annoying, I can't dance to bad music unless I'm completely hammered and even then I feel a bit dirty.

Oasis_Dublin · 05-12-2010 9:55pm

Kold wrote: »

You didn't say anything about disliking the early albums, you stated that people who had a preference for the albums after Kid A was a good hint that someone was a musical snob.

I was very explicit in pointing out that this was personalised towards my group of friends. It is a flawed argument outside my group of friends sure, but when I put their reasons in quotation marks in my previous point, it was to show the snobbish reasons behind their disliking of the earlier albums. I'm not saying every single person that likes Radiohead's later work more than earlier work is a music snob, I'm saying that there are good reasons why my friends would be called music snobs. Can this point now be put to bed because it has been explained, on my part, to death.

"Radiohead's best work has come about since Kid A", that is what I said. This very clearly suggests liking latter albums over earlier albums. I'm not sure why this is causing you such a great deal of confusion.

Kold wrote: »

I love Radiohead, my favourite band. I think what really sets them apart from other groups is their integrity and dedication to producing good music. They embraced technology and other genres in order to help them make the best music they could. You stated that it was a fact that they'd disappeared up their own arses, whilst this may have been tongue in cheek, this just suggests to me that you refused to try and accept a different sound. That you like your traditional rock song and the fact that they moved beyond that makes you think they were pretentious.

I also love Radiohead. They embraced new things, great. They still haven't made an album better than The Bends. I've tried to like their most recent 4 albums and there are fantastic tracks on them all. I still prefer the earlier albums how and ever. Far more consistent (although I'm sure people will identify them as being 'boring' and 'safe')

Kold wrote: »

If pretentious is making the music you want to make then great. Of course I'm sure I'm completely wrong about this but if you want to refute it, make a new thread and I'll happily debate it there.

I don't know that Radiohead are making music they that like. They are making music that is different to their earlier work.

Kold wrote: »

I never refuted that I was one, music is one of my biggest interests and whilst I have no real musical education, I do reckon I have a greater knowledge on contemporary music than most. But I reckon there are worse than me out there, I don't like belittling people so if the topic is on music, I'll try and talk about a common interest which is often viable due to the amount of types of music I listen to.

Maybe you do have a "greater" knowledge of music than me (presuming you mean hearing music and deciding you like it rather than actually playing music), maybe you don't. Either of us will do well to prove or debunk that statement here.

Kold wrote: »

Now to go one step further, I would suggest that there is a maturing process to music appreciation. Hence why so many of us cringe at the music we used to listen to as teenagers. I used to think Tupac was the epitome of honest lyricism. Now I look at a lot of his lyrics as being pretty unsophisticated, but if you told me that then I'd have argued it until blue in the face. He still made some of the best songs about f*cking I've heard. But Kings of Leon, sh*t's just annoying, I can't dance to bad music unless I'm completely hammered and even then I feel a bit dirty.

There is a maturing process yes. I used to love Costello Music when it first came out but I haven't listened to it in a while because it's a bit teeny bop. I think it's a bit unfair to sweep every song ever made by KOL under the rug though, much as they are not one of my favourite bands (by a long shot).

KeanSeenan · 05-12-2010 10:33pm

Oasis_Dublin wrote: »

I've called those people I know music snobs because they dislike early Radiohead because the music was "too simple" or "too generic" or because Creep became "too big", all moronic reasons to dislike a whole section of a band's career. It really is extremely simple. Not that I would expect you to understand that.

I don't think it's moronic to dislike something because it is 'simple', after all good art is supposed to challenge you(imo) and if it has no depth or difference to whatever else is out at the time then why should anybody listen?I think the people that you are calling snobs simply just have a better taste in music than you.
It didn't happen with Radiohead but sometimes when a band gets a 'mainstream hit' they are thrown a lot of money which pushes them towards filtering their original ideas through people which shouldn't have a say in it.

g5fd6ow0hseima · 05-12-2010 10:58pm

To me, ive always held that a music snob in the popular sense - and not my own - is one who goes to great lengths to show their taste in music. An example being ostentatious punks / metal fans.

Looking from another angle, to someone who doesnt care for music and is more than happy to listen to the chart music, I would undoubtedly be a music snob, mostly because I really enjoy talking about music with other fans. In fact, its the only social outlet which I enjoy because I can no longer tolerate the clubs I used to frequent a few years ago. Basically, I light up at the thought of chatting to someone about music, or being introduced to a new artist. But if there was someone who doesnt have a blind bit of interest in music, by listening to me rant on about albums and gigs, they might think of me as a snob because im showing off my taste and exposing their lack-of. Indeed, I'm guilty of viewing people who go to restaurants as snobs as im one of those who eats to live.

One thing I will shout from the rooftops is: If you've to alter your dress sense to demonstrate your music preferences, you're not just a music snob, you're also a wanker.

Oasis_Dublin · 05-12-2010 11:01pm

KeanSeenan wrote: »

I don't think it's moronic to dislike something because it is 'simple', after all good art is supposed to challenge you(imo) and if it has no depth or difference to whatever else is out at the time then why should anybody listen?I think the people that you are calling snobs simply just have a better taste in music than you.
It didn't happen with Radiohead but sometimes when a band gets a 'mainstream hit' they are thrown a lot of money which pushes them towards filtering their original ideas through people which shouldn't have a say in it.

The same people I know who dismiss it for being simple couldn't play a G chord on a guitar. They know shag all about how the music is played. Their sources for how difficult the music is to play are usually similarly ignorant gombeens on internet forums.

Radiohead's earlier albums do have some "depth" and it was not the same as other music being released.

I think the people that you are calling snobs simply just have a better taste in music than you

(BEAR IN MIND I AM ONCE MORE TALKING ABOUT MY FRIENDS SO DO NOT CLAIM THAT I AM GENERALISING!!!)

Music snobs

Comments