Evaluations...

[nadroj1985]

I couldn't decide whether this belongs more in the philosophy forum or here, but I want to know the answers of the people that frequent this forum the most. So here goes...

The main thing that has been bothering me lately about music(although this could apply to any sort of art)...how do I really determine what music I like and don't like? Lately I've had a sneaking suspicion that I decide whether or not I'll like a piece of music before I hear it. Part of this stems from the fact that I am interested in music history, so I read up on quite a few artists, and read many reviews of their music before I actually hear it. I find myself forming opinions about the artists before I have experienced their work. To use a recent example: I recently bought Patti Smith's debut album, Horses. Before buying it, though, I read many reviews of the album and some history of Smith herself. I became convinced that her music was the type of music I would really enjoy: she wrote about controversial topics, was apparently a great lyricist, had a voice that was unconventional, sung with a lot of emotion, etc. When I bought the album, I loved it, largely for those reasons. But had I just convinced myself to love it because of what I had read, and justified that claim after the fact? I am reminded of the large quantity of music I own that took time to "grow on me." Is that simply a sign that I was slowly trying to convince myself to like the music, and finally succeeded? It worries me, because I think that's a very real possibility. I tend to like the albums I think I'll like, and dislike the ones I think I'll dislike... which leads me to question how I evaluate music. To what degree am I influenced by critics I respect? What led me to respect those critics in the first place? To what degree am I influenced by the urge to rebel against the preconcieved notions of pop music? There are many things like this that make me wonder how honest I'm being in my evaluations of music. But then that little thought creeps into my head...."does it matter?" I honestly don't know...

Thoughts?

 

[Qyöt27]

I can see what the point you're trying to make is. There have been a few times I've read reviews on albums, especially on allmusic.com, that look a little interesting, and because I'm generally checking out an album by an artist I've kept hearing about as an influence on a band or genre I already know I like, I know there's a great possibility I will like them, but like everything, there are exceptions. For example, I like Goth Rock and a lot of those artists generally list Bauhaus as an influence. I really only like one of Bauhaus's songs, and even then it's a remix, and that's what makes it appealing. I generally will hear about an artist, read a little bit about them, and then try to hear their music as quickly as possible after I read the article so I can judge for myself without being influenced by the bias of the article, whatever that bias may be.

A good example, bringing up the Goth Rock point from before: I had seen All About Eve listed as an important Goth Rock artist, but I never really heard anything else about them. I recently had heard another one of Gene Loves Jezebel's songs on one of the Digital Music stations, and I decided to look into their profile, which lead into looking at All About Eve, since the lead singer was Gene Loves Jezebel's former bassist. It said that the band was more earthy and grounded and often was first seen as just another pop-Goth band, but that the songwriting was actually very deep. Now, the song that was hailed a lot, 'Martha's Harbour', I didn't really care for when I first heard it, but that was after I'd heard some of their other less hailed material, simply because I'd been able to get access to that first. I can say that those songs are among my favorites now, but it often wasn't from a critic's influence (and I still don't like 'Martha's Harbour' all that much). I, by nature, would prefer to judge something on my own rather than have my opinion influenced by someone else's. And case in point, I don't really read many music reviews, although I do read some.

I think a person judges what they like and don't like on music they already like. That's why people will often stick exclusively to listening to one genre if they can. Usually someone who likes a lot of different styles will have exponential growth in the new types of music they start liking, and that will lead to new styles that they discover, and the styles they like multiply like rabbits. In some cases, I think part of it has to do with psychology. The music your parents listen to, and in turn, expose you to when you're young, does something with your own choices (I can only imagine what music my kids are going to turn out liking, since I especially like Industrial music). Those early experiences leave a mark, and while it won't necessarily make a person listen to exactly what their parents listen to, it can affect the severity, philosophical depth, and instrumental arrangements that occur in the songs, artists, and genres you do listen to. People also naturally just have sounds they like hearing, topics they like to hear expressed, and other nuances that come into play when listening to music. It might even affect how you decide what you'll like or don't like. Of course, experience outside the home might affect it too. I, personally, was not a hard rock person until almost the end of my 8th grade year. I stuck mostly to adult contemporary, AOR-ish modern rock, some rap and R&B, and a lot of 80s and classic rock (even classic hard rock and 80s hair metal, since those were still lumped into that same retro category). Of course, throughout middle school I had dealt with self-esteem problems, emotional things, and various other hardships. In 8th grade, external pressures went away, and I became internally pressured, not to mention the fact I now also found myself strongly attracted to one of my classmates, in a degree that I'd never felt before (or felt since; after all, I still feel the same way about her), so that created another pressure. When I got into hard rock at the end of 8th, it was like a burden had been lifted. It was new, exciting, and it expressed what I felt. I went through a rap-metal phase, a Grunge phase, an alt. rock phase, a pop-punk phase, and most importantly, an Industrial phase, all by the end of 9th grade. I found that Industrial fit my frame of mind the best (and when I started listening to a lot of Goth Rock, that was another that fit the best). I'm convinced that had to do with the way I was treated throughout jr. high and the way I would consistently attack myself. Psychologically, that music spoke the most to me. And because I went through all those phases (plus more) I have a wide variety of likes and dislikes.

I think there's nothing wrong with rebelling against conventions, or giving into the urge to rebel either (this of course, coming from someone who constantly makes people confused by rebelling to conform to rebel to conform; I'm a walking, living, breathing philosophical argument).

There are many things like this that make me wonder how honest I'm being in my evaluations of music. But then that little thought creeps into my head...."does it matter?" I honestly don't know...

'Does it matter?' probably is the most important question here. There's most likely a proverb somewhere that says something like what I'm about to say, but here goes:

If someone is content with where they are, do they try to seek out something to make them content? Obviously, no. When they start searching for something new, it's because they've tired of what they've been content with, or because there's still something deep inside that isn't contented. Now, if you were content with conventional pop music, why would you feel the urge to rebel? What is the purpose of the urge to rebel? If the urge is allowed to take over, what is the harm, considering you're probably constantly finding something new and engaging because of it? Is it really an urge to rebel in the first place, or are you not wanting to give into an urge to conform?

 

[nadroj1985]

Now, if you were content with conventional pop music, why would you feel the urge to rebel? What is the purpose of the urge to rebel? If the urge is allowed to take over, what is the harm, considering you're probably constantly finding something new and engaging because of it? Is it really an urge to rebel in the first place, or are you not wanting to give into an urge to conform?

I think there are a few things that could be happening. For instance, I think there is a fundamental urge in us (which is not necessarily rational) to rebel against a popular way of thinking; that could be a factor. Of course, I could alse be a conformist, who is just conforming to a less popular standard than most. Both of these could be influences on music taste.

 

[ps139]

Nadroj I think you're fine as long as you never get to the point where your rating of a band's quality depends on how popular they are. I know 2 kids who will love bands, but once they become popular, they "stop liking them" and talk trash about them. Its utter absurdity. Obviously to them its not about the music at all, but about perceived social connotations, and thats pathetic. So, as long as you can enjoy whatever song without caring if its #1 on the charts or if you are the only person who has ever heard it, you're fine. Enjoy the music for the music.

With reviews, I do not like to read them until after I listen to the CDs. I want to go in with a fresh and unbiased perspective. Its like watching a movie, I dont want to know much about it before I go in.

 

[nadroj1985]

Nadroj I think you're fine as long as you never get to the point where your rating of a band's quality depends on how popular they are. I know 2 kids who will love bands, but once they become popular, they "stop liking them" and talk trash about them. Its utter absurdity. Obviously to them its not about the music at all, but about perceived social connotations, and thats pathetic. So, as long as you can enjoy whatever song without caring if its #1 on the charts or if you are the only person who has ever heard it, you're fine. Enjoy the music for the music.

I think you're missing a subtlety here, however, or perhaps many subtleties. Perhaps I am rating them based on popularity, but merely the popularity of another group of people, namely critics. I would like to listen to a CD without having read about it beforehand, but if I don't read about it beforehand, how do I know whether it's worth listening to or not? If not for critics and other sources of music information, I would never have heard of many of the bands I now love.

 

[stonetoflesh]

I think you're missing a subtlety here, however, or perhaps many subtleties. Perhaps I am rating them based on popularity, but merely the popularity of another group of people, namely critics. I would like to listen to a CD without having read about it beforehand, but if I don't read about it beforehand, how do I know whether it's worth listening to or not?

I'm in a similar situation. Music criticism has always been (and will always be) hit-or-miss. I've bought plenty of albums based on critical opinions. A well-written review can go a long way in altering my perceptions of an album or artist before I've heard a single note-- for better or for worse. I've had some very rewarding experiences buying albums based on published criticism, but I've also gotten burned plenty of times; I guess that's just the way it goes though.
On the other hand, there certainly is something to be said for random acquisitions. I've bought a number of albums knowing little to nothing about the artist and been pleased.

If not for critics and other sources of music information I would never have heard of many of the bands I now love.

Agreed... Thank goodness for those sources!

 

[ps139]

I would like to listen to a CD without having read about it beforehand, but if I don't read about it beforehand, how do I know whether it's worth listening to or not?

Every album is worth listening to. If it is a terrible album, and you listen to it, then you found out for yourself that its terrible, and you know not to listen to it again. So there is no such thing as "wasted listening time." There is wasted money but thats why I download songs to get a feel for the band.

When I want to get into new music, I don't really read what the critics write. I look for interviews with the musician. I want to know what Trey listens to, or what Jerry Garcia grew up on, or what influenced Jimmy Page. Why? Because I think artists have better opinions than the critics. They know the music better and I think they probably have a better sense of whats truly good music, in general.