Taking music too seriously

Chuck Stone

Coldplay are shit though.

First time I seen/listened to this I was in tears laughing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_9x27VRwWM

readyletsgo

flutterflye wrote: »

Not really sure.
Just noticed it - the music snobbery just seems to abate.

I understand what your saying, in a weird way.

I used to be mad into dance eletro underground rock, anything really except pop, back in the 90's & 2000's everything was 'pop' or sh!t dance and it pissed me right off.
I did discover Boards of Canada back in 1997 (as I have said on here before) and got obssessed with them and anything from the label they are on and spanning off from there, between 16 and I'd say 28 then I just stopped following all that music all the time. I still listen to that music and love it but I kinda keep it to myself as opposed to talking about it loads in my late teens to early 20's, although a few old friends did say I helped expand their musical tastes back in the day with me bangin on about it:D.

Now I still find new acts all the time, I enjoy them, go to gigs all the time, but something does change as you get older, music is still everything to me but I will never fall down that road of Lady GaGa chart stuff (who is keeping that chart alive nowadays?) etc, as I have said before, pop music is for people who do not like music, think thats more than 4% than someone already said with the amusica or whatever it was called.



Also, The Beatles, MOST OVERRATED BAND IN THE WORLD!

Also I hate football :pac:

Sky King

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

I know, it's so ridiculous. Arguing about one band being better than another is no better than arguing blue is better than red. The sound of someone falling down a stairs has equal merit to Stairway to Heaven. Some people refuse to understand that.

I disagree with this. If you set genre and popularity totally aside and just look at the craft that's gone into a track, i think you can definitively say one band is better than another.

Take someone like The Blizzards or The Coronas or one of those interchangeable, sh!t, derivative, three chord, intro verse verse chorus verse outro bands and compare their music to bands like Dream Theatre, who have tracks up to ten minutes long encompasing several key changes and multitudes of time signiatures in a variaty of phrasing excecuted with virtuosic precision .... I don't like either one's music per se but it's pretty clear to me which band is better.

Jester252

I like what I like and I don't care what people think

Chazz Michael Michaels

Dudess wrote: »

And some people make silly disingenuous attention-seeking comments like "The sound of someone falling down the stairs is of equal merit to Stairway To Heaven". I mean yeah, it's all just sound isn't it? Chat magazine and Hard Times - both just a bunch of words on paper.
T-shirt from Penneys, well-tailored coat from All Saints - the exact same thing really, they're both clothes.

Sky King wrote: »

So.... who like Bressie?

I don't but that 'Breakin my Balls" chorus sticks in your head something fierce.

I like it a lot - very catchy song!

If you're going to have that attitude you can go **** yourself.

Logical Fallacy

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

If you're going to have that attitude you can go **** yourself.

I think you are taking this whole not taking music too seriously thing a bit too seriously.

minidazzler

readyletsgo wrote: »

Also, The Beatles, MOST OVERRATED BAND IN THE WORLD!

Let us discuss why your needed to proclaim in size 6 font that the Beatles are the most overrated band in the world. Could you be seeking attention perchance? Or just looking for a rise out of people.

IMO, for the time they were out the beatles were well rated, not over or under, just right. I really enjoy their music though they're not my personal favourites.

Mindkiller

Some people are just passionate about the kinds of music they listen to. Just because someone thinks the music you listen to is bad doesn't make them a snob. Actual music 'snobs' don't just listen to wildly obscure experimental babble either. People who listen to Lady Gaga or Linkin Park can be just as big a snob as the guy with the Animal Collective t-shirt.

Sky King

Quit breakin my balls Chazz.

Breaking my balls, breaking my balls!

ash23

My ex was a music snob. Himself and his mates used to congratulate themselves about how "alternative" they were in their musical tastes. The irony of them all liking the same thing never occured to them.
Meanwhile they'd scoff at my musical taste and look down on those of us "sheep" who like anything mainstream.
Yawn.
It got dull!

enfant terrible

Sky King wrote: »

I disagree with this. If you set genre and popularity totally aside and just look at the craft that's gone into a track, i think you can definitively say one band is better than another.

Take someone like The Blizzards or The Coronas or one of those interchangeable, sh!t, derivative, three chord, intro verse verse chorus verse outro bands and compare their music to bands like Dream Theatre, who have tracks up to ten minutes long encompasing several key changes and multitudes of time signiatures in a variaty of phrasing excecuted with virtuosic precision .... I don't like either one's music per se but it's pretty clear to me which band is better.

Just because a song is more complex doesn't mean it's better.

Logical Fallacy

minidazzler wrote: »

Let us discuss why your needed to proclaim in size 6 font that the Beatles are the most overrated band in the world. Could you be seeking attention perchance? Or just looking for a rise out of people.

IMO, for the time they were out the beatles were well rated, not over or under, just right. I really enjoy their music though they're not my personal favourites.

It's because they have sold more records than anyone else in history and changed the course of music a couple of times.

I'm not a huge fan but I can't think of any argument as to why they are "overrated".

Dudess

enfant terrible wrote: »

Just because a song is more complex doesn't mean it's better.

Objectively speaking, a piece of music involving more creativity, imagination, effort, originality is better. Subjectively, if a person prefers System Addict by Five Star to Pink Floyd's Comfortably Numb (I like both equally) it's just personal taste.

Ruralyoke

Dudess wrote: »

Objectively speaking, a piece of music involving more creativity, imagination, effort, originality is better.

Maybe I'm not a snob then? Just objective!

<phew>

af_thefragile

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

If there was no point in taking music seriously then Pink Floyd, King Crimson and any other great bands would never have existed in the first place. No musician can achieve a damn thing unless they take it seriously.
If you have no intention of ever setting foot on a stage then yes, in that case I would agree with you. It's absolutely crucial to take it seriously if you want to become any good at it. Just like anything else. Nobody became any good at anything by just having a "whatever" atittude towards it. That's my take anyway.

I'll agree if that's what you want to do for a living then you should take it seriously. Anyone who doesn't take his job seriously will not do a good job. That's actually quite evident lately where people want to make music and/or join a band because they wanna be on stage and want to get fame/money/girls/whatever and not because they want to create something amazing. I read a while ago that the difference between a virtuoso musician and a good-average musician is that the good/average musician will practice his instrument for a few hours a few times a week (I don't remember the exact average but its like 3-4hrs x 3-4 days a week) while a virtuoso musician practices his instrument at least 6hrs 6 days a week. Its though this level of dedication that a musician attains mastery over his instrument and stands out from the others. Its true for athelethes and pretty much everything else in life too. Anyway that's a seperate topic.

What I'm saying is I respect people who put in the time and dedication to attain mastery over their instruments and create great music. And there are also a lot of musicians out there who produce "music that sells". Its just some catchy tunes produced to make it to the top of the charts for a few weeks before the next catchy tune takes over and ultimately its just a money making business. Not saying its wrong or bad because its just entertainment and that's ultimately what music is. Just that I wouldn't necessarily respect what these musicians do.

Finally my point about not taking music seriously was aimed towards people who try to recognise themselves with a certain type of music cultre. Like the metal heads, goths/emos, ravers etc. Or people who think music bring a change to the world or change the course of events. As a form of expression music is very weak. All music can do is stimulate certain emotions within the listener but it rarely brings the audience to think and reflect upon itself. Imo poetry is the strongest form of expression, then comes prose, then film and other visual arts and finally there's music. The poetry of Robert Frost or the words of George Orwell create a much greater impact upon the reader than any form of music can. Sadly we're increasingly becoming a society of watchers and listeners. We try to gain our knowledge and inspiration from films and music and very few of us have any time left to reflect upon any words of poetry or prose. We'ld rather watch a movie than read a book and we'ld rather listen to a musician performing his music than a poet reciting his poetry.

Don't know where I'm going with this...

Napper Hawkins

enfant terrible wrote: »

Just because a song is more complex doesn't mean it's better.

You're right, some of the best songs ever written were also the simplest.

But as I've pointed out earlier, it really comes down to whether you give a ****e about music or not.

I listen to Meshuggah, not just because I enjoy the shit out of them but also because I want my music to challenge me, I want to understand what they do so that I can have a better understanding of what I want to achieve with my own musical efforts.

Justin Bieber makes me feel like my brain cells are evaporating with each note. I wouldn't judge someone for liking it though, it's created for folks who don't care, they just want to dance etc. That's fine.

Dream Theater, virtuosos that they are, are awful crap imo, but damn I wish I could play as well as they can.

Dudess

Chazz Michael Michaels wrote: »

If you're going to have that attitude you can go **** yourself.

Ok sorry for my tone, but your comment was as dismissive as that of the apparent hordes of music snobs out there.

Latchy

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

It's because they have sold more records than anyone else in history and changed the course of music a couple of times.

I'm not a huge fan but I can't think of any argument as to why they are "overrated".

Indeed ...you don't have to like them but saying the Beatles are most overated band in history is the fasionable thing to say in some circles these days but what really bugs many of these people is the idea that millions do like them ,as much as they like other groups and for all the right musical reason reasons to .

AnonoBoy

Two types of music.

Good music and bad music.

But pretending to be a music snob is hilarious fun when it riles people up. It's a great way to troll in real life.

Napper Hawkins

af_thefragile wrote: »

I'll agree if that's what you want to do for a living then you should take it seriously. Anyone who doesn't take his job seriously will not do a good job. That's actually quite evident lately where people want to make music and/or join a band because they wanna be on stage and want to get fame/money/girls/whatever and not because they want to create something amazing. I read a while ago that the difference between a virtuoso musician and a good-average musician is that the good/average musician will practice his instrument for a few hours a few times a week (I don't remember the exact average but its like 3-4hrs x 3-4 days a week) while a virtuoso musician practices his instrument at least 6hrs 6 days a week. Its though this level of dedication that a musician attains mastery over his instrument and stands out from the others. Its true for athelethes and pretty much everything else in life too. Anyway that's a seperate topic.

What I'm saying is I respect people who put in the time and dedication to attain mastery over their instruments and create great music. And there are also a lot of musicians out there who produce "music that sells". Its just some catchy tunes produced to make it to the top of the charts for a few weeks before the next catchy tune takes over and ultimately its just a money making business. Not saying its wrong or bad because its just entertainment and that's ultimately what music is. Just that I wouldn't necessarily respect what these musicians do.

Finally my point about not taking music seriously was aimed towards people who try to recognise themselves with a certain type of music cultre. Like the metal heads, goths/emos, ravers etc. Or people who think music bring a change to the world or change the course of events. As a form of expression music is very weak. All music can do is stimulate certain emotions within the listener but it rarely brings the audience to think and reflect upon itself. Imo poetry is the strongest form of expression, then comes prose, then film and other visual arts and finally there's music. The poetry of Robert Frost or the words of George Orwell create a much greater impact upon the reader than any form of music can. Sadly we're increasingly becoming a society of watchers and listeners. We try to gain our knowledge and inspiration from films and music and very few of us have any time left to reflect upon any words of poetry or prose. We'ld rather watch a movie than read a book and we'ld rather listen to a musician performing his music than a poet reciting his poetry.

Don't know where I'm going with this...

Aye, I get ya. One thing I take issue with though is your assertion that any form of expression is weaker than any other. That is purely your own personal opinion that music is weaker than say, poetry. I enjoy both but get more out of music, not sure either of us are gonna reach a definitve conclusion to be fair, such is the nature of the subject!

stovelid

Latchy wrote: »

Ditto !

I've always loved the fact that there is so much diversity in music out there to explore and enjoy which is why my musical tastes go right across the board ie, popular classics/ pop/rock /soul /folk /electronic / blues .

Obviously there is music I detest - even to the point of wondering how people can like it - but it would never be a basis for genuine bafflement or judgment.

Plus I like (as in genuinely, not ironically) some pretty ropey stuff myself

Fluorescence

As far as I'm concerned, no one can take music too seriously. It is one of the only redeeming features of the human race.

stovelid

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Two types of music.

Good music and bad music.

To be honest, it's more music you like and music you don't like.

Latchy

stovelid wrote: »

Obviously there is music I detest - even to the point of wondering how people can like it - but it would never be a basis for genuine bafflement or judgment.

Plus I like (as in genuinely, not ironically) some pretty ropey stuff myself

Yes, I'm with you on that to and I can think of several artist and bands I detest and cringe when they even mention them ( as well as getting a few laughs out of by both partys ) but if that's what people like then that's fine by me ...there's plenty of room for bad taste :pac:

Musically with movies and tv advertisiment there are many who discover a song or instrumental for the first time which they may like but didn't know much about the song or artist before .Two recent tv adds spring to mind ,Elizabethan Serenade (by Ronald Binge orchestra ) in the Tesco add and God Only Knows (by the Beach Boys ) in the motoring add.

( both of which incidently, I made you tube videos of several years ago )

leggo

Dudess wrote: »

Says he with the dance music sig (but it's ok because charty dance is "down to earth") and I would think much of what you say above is not reality and just a notion in your head.

I love music. I'm a DJ, it's my job to love music, I didn't claim otherwise. I just don't use it to try and make myself appear superior to others*. And being open about liking chart dance music, which will get run down by snobs of any genre every single day of the week since it's popular, actually proves that.

*Instead, I focus on a good command of the English language and the ability to get multi-syllabic on someone's ass. That, and a good dose of general sneering at those less fortunate than I, leaves me feeling pre-tty damn good about myself.

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

But clearly it does bother you. I've seen you running down people, genres etc on boards.

Hell , you once accused me of being part of Facebook conspiracy against you.

I reckon it bothers you a lot.

Again...

Facebook conspiracy? Refresh my memory by PM if you would (because nobody really cares here), but to the best of my recollection that just didn't happen man. I've no problem with you. I think we were on opposite sides during that whole mess on the EDM board way back, but I actually like and agree with a lot of your posts.

But I'm not getting dragged into this again. I don't run down people and genres. At one stage, I slagged off and ran down people who run down people and genres, so that's probably where you're getting confused. Then I learned that there's no point getting into it if you don't have hours upon hours to spare arguing pointless battles where neither side will ultimately convince the other.

Bipolar Joe

I actually think less of a person if they don't like Pixies. There, I said it.

Funglegunk

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

I actually think less of a person if they don't like Pixies. There, I said it.

You certainly did.

Shryke

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

I actually think less of a person if they don't like Pixies. There, I said it.

I can dig that.

Sky King

enfant terrible wrote: »

Just because a song is more complex doesn't mean it's better.

I know, I never said it did.

Dudess

leggo wrote: »

I love music. I'm a DJ, it's my job to love music, I didn't claim otherwise. I just don't use it to try and make myself appear superior to others*. And being open about liking chart dance music, which will get run down by snobs of any genre every single day of the week since it's popular, actually proves that.

[SIZE="1"]*Instead, I focus on a good command of the English language and the ability to get multi-syllabic on someone's ass. That, and a good dose of general sneering at those less fortunate than I, leaves me feeling pre-tty damn good about myself.[/SIZE]

I don't understand the last bit but while I can understand objection to genuine music snobs, it's just as bad to attack people for simply saying they dislike certain popular genres. Maybe some of those dance music snobs are simply stating they dislike this type if music? I like some of it btw (Calvin Harris and some David Guetta).

Mr Benevolent

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

In fairness, anyone who wants to be considered a music snob and can only come up with The Beatles for "Best Band Ever" needs to rethink things a bit.

The more obscure and unknown the better for that kind of answer. Let the world know that you know secrets.

Obscure eh? Try Daan. Feckin' brilliant and almost completely unknown outside Belgium.

wonton

Sky King wrote: »

I know, I never said it did.

he never said you said it did.

Micky Dolenz

Music is art, Man.

dodderangler

I hate the Beatles can't stand their music or any type of music similar and my mate loves them and we get into stupid arguments over it cuz he takes it way to serious can't argue with someone just cuz don't like same music

Shryke

dodderangler wrote: »

I hate the Beatles can't stand their music or any type of music similar and my mate loves them and we get into stupid arguments over it cuz he takes it way to serious can't argue with someone just cuz don't like same music

Reading this is making me dyslexic.

Mindkiller

dodderangler wrote: »

I hate the Beatles can't stand their music or any type of music similar and my mate loves them and we get into stupid arguments over it cuz he takes it way to serious can't argue with someone just cuz don't like same music

Have you actually listened to them? As in, have you listened to most of their discography and not just a few radio songs? If not, go check out the White Album, Abbey Road and Revolver and maybe you'll be in a better position to argue with your mate. He doesn't sound like a music snob to me.

dodderangler

Yes I listened to them in his house at gaf parties and whatever and still think their **** nothing gonna change it

Samich

I made this thread months and months ago :pac:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=73609898

leggo

Dudess wrote: »

I don't understand the last bit but while I can understand objection to genuine music snobs, it's just as bad to attack people for simply saying they dislike certain popular genres. Maybe some of those dance music snobs are simply stating they dislike this type if music? I like some of it btw (Calvin Harris and some David Guetta).

Last bit was just messing. Nah, again my problem comes with the hypocrisy involved in the dislike of certain genres. My own opinion about music is that, even if I don't like a certain song, if any type of track connects with other people then it's done its job. It doesn't really matter what I, or anyone else, thinks (though I'd still give it a listen and might still think it's crap...but who cares if I do?). The song isn't for me. Some people like it. That's kind of the idea of music.

So when musical snobs use this to give off an air of superiority, then that's hypocritical to me. Because they judge people based on musical likes and dislikes, a small and often irrelevant part of anyone's overall make-up, thereby implying that they have very little else going for them except for the music they listen to (written and composed by other people), since that's their basis for judgement.

So, with that little in their lives to speak of (except for the creativity of others to obsess over), how are they in any way superior to anyone else? What right do they have? Again, I wouldn't even mind if they kept their preconceptions to themselves, but musical snobs tend to be very vocal and, thus, unavoidable.

flutterflye

Okay, just to clarify - whatever it is you think I meant - I probably didn't!
Loads of people seem to have picked me up wrong - must be my fault seeing as so many picked me up wrong.

Firstly, I love music - all genres of music (well I don't like jazz in general, alot of modern r&b, and a few others).
But mostly, I will listen to anything and everything.
It depends on my mood at the time alot too.
I can see the artistry in most forms of music, even if I personally do not like it.
I don't stick with just one or two genres, although I'd be more drawn to rock in general I think.

I probably love music more now than when I was younger.
I really feel it now, I really appreciate it for what it is.

When I was talking about copping on and growing out of it in my much earlier post, I was talking about that pretentious snobbery that is so prevalent with teenage years, and early 20's.

It makes sense that as you first gain some independence and search for an identity, that music would be a strong part of this.
I imagine this is the case for most people - it was for me anyway.

But there are also a lot of people who take this waaay too far, and become stuck way up their own ass, believing that their sense of what 'good music' is, is far superior to anyone with any slightly altering view.
And not only this, but this tends to be pretty much the only topic of conversation with these people - they have invested too much of themselves in their music that they cannot seem to separate from it.

I'm still amn't explaining myself properly!
Hopefully someone understands!!

Just basically that complete and utter pretentious snobbery that alot of people (mainly males actually I think) have up to a certain point in time, in which case they finally see that there is more to life and to themselves.
They do not like their music less, they just aren't so encompassed in it.

As much as these people annoy me - the sports versions of them are sooo much worse!!

wonton

could anyone that thinks music is taken too seriously please turn on the eurovision.

grindle

I once hired someone because of his taste in music.

Anybody that doesn't smell bad, but likes Slint, is alright by me.

BazDel

I'm not that into music. I know the names of bands and singers but only because everyone always talks about them. If you name a song or album I'll be hard pressed to guess who sings it or wrote it. I just don't have the interest to remember the information. I just zone out when chat turns to gigs, festivals or "this person is playing here" talk.

Having said that I don't dislike music. I do enjoy listening to songs but don't depend on them like so many people around do. Some people have their Ipods in 24/7 and have libraries with 1000's of songs. I have 100... :rolleyes:

I would love to be very interested in music and be enthusiastic about it. It would provide an easy topic to chat about as most of my friends know their stuff.

Dudess

leggo wrote: »

Dudess wrote: »

I don't understand the last bit but while I can understand objection to genuine music snobs, it's just as bad to attack people for simply saying they dislike certain popular genres. Maybe some of those dance music snobs are simply stating they dislike this type if music? I like some of it btw (Calvin Harris and some David Guetta).

Last bit was just messing. Nah, again my problem comes with the hypocrisy involved in the dislike of certain genres. My own opinion about music is that, even if I don't like a certain song, if any type of track connects with other people then it's done its job. It doesn't really matter what I, or anyone else, thinks (though I'd still give it a listen and might still think it's crap...but who cares if I do?). The song isn't for me. Some people like it. That's kind of the idea of music.

So when musical snobs use this to give off an air of superiority, then that's hypocritical to me. Because they judge people based on musical likes and dislikes, a small and often irrelevant part of anyone's overall make-up, thereby implying that they have very little else going for them except for the music they listen to (written and composed by other people), since that's their basis for judgement.

So, with that little in their lives to speak of (except for the creativity of others to obsess over), how are they in any way superior to anyone else? What right do they have? Again, I wouldn't even mind if they kept their preconceptions to themselves, but musical snobs tend to be very vocal and, thus, unavoidable.

Are you saying it's musical snobbery to simply dislike certain genres and to express this?

Latchy

wonton wrote: »

could anyone that thinks music is taken too seriously please turn on the eurovision.

It's as much about hype, politcs , favoritism and appearences as the actual music

leggo wrote: »

So when musical snobs use this to give off an air of superiority, then that's hypocritical to me. Because they judge people based on musical likes and dislikes, a small and often irrelevant part of anyone's overall make-up, thereby implying that they have very little else going for them except for the music they listen to (written and composed by other people), since that's their basis for judgement.

I seemed to be surrounded by these musical snobs when growing up ,like you had to have some reason to like a particular song or group or explain why you bought a ticket to go see a group they didn't think were hip .

Well go figure fcukwits ...because I liked em ...Dohhhh ! :rolleyes:

^ These same people are now to be found spending their evenings on You Tube , ripping into the musical tastes of people around the world and responsible for most of the thumbs down signs to .

evolving_doors

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Music is art, Man.

Naa,

all 'artists' I know are moody/broody as hell.

All musicians I know are happy with their lot.

Generally nowadays if someone asks me what music I listen too, I just tell em "meh, you wouldn't have heard of them and you probably wouldn;t like em anyway". Don;t care if I'm called a snob anymore, I'm tired of trying to tell people what they might like.

leggo

Dudess wrote: »

Are you saying it's musical snobbery to simply dislike certain genres and to express this?

No, that's part and parcel of music. It's the condescension and air of superiority that I dislike. You can't talk down to, or claim to know better than, someone about something completely subjective.

flutterflye

Armelodie wrote: »

Naa,

all 'artists' I know are moody/broody as hell.

All musicians I know are happy with their lot.

Wtf is this sh1t??

grindle

leggo wrote: »

1)You can't talk down to, or 2)claim to know better than, someone about something 3)completely subjective.

1)You can, if 2) you do, and 3) it's not completely subjective, just partially subjective.
I don't like Mozart much, but he's an incredible composer.
I just haven't built much of a frame of reference to have a need for his overtly happy music.
Some music is objectively terrible through and through. Irredeemably so.

30txsbzmcu2k9w

leggo wrote: »

No, that's part and parcel of music. It's the condescension and air of superiority that I dislike. You can't talk down to, or claim to know better than, someone about something completely subjective.

Music is not completely subjective though, there are other factors to acknowledge.
Music is an art form, a craft. So saying the cookie cutter sh!te Simon Cowell peddles is on par with Aphex Twin is like equating an MS Paint drawing of a dick and balls to a Caravaggio.
Maybe there´s an appreciation that some people lack, they just want something to hum along to in the car or dance to in Coppers, but it´s their loss.