I Confess : What sucks most about your musical tastes and attitudes ?

I don't seek it out...but then I don't seek out anything. But when I hear it I find the lyrics amusing (in the same way as the writings of Stewart Home).

After all that, I don't even sympathise with Cobain, before you go thinking.

This is interesting to me because most characteristics of pop music that shift units are easily identified, analyzed and critiqued by those who frequent this board (there are a lot of smart people hanging out here!) There is no loss of words in explaining Britney, or even Creed.

The violence in hip-hop is easy to explain, at least in terms of the U.S. Violence is everywhere, so why not in music? People get some kind of visceral thrill from hearing the description of carnage; same way Pulp Fiction got the blood pumping, or Doom or Quake or whatever.

The misogyny is tougher. I'd be interested in knowing what percentage of those who bought Dre's 2001 are men. If it were all men listening to this stuff, then I'd have to say most guys hearing those lyrics are getting some kind of assurance from them. Having their fear of women relieved by song after song putting the "hos" in their place, reducing half the population to nothing more than "something to poke on."

Eminem sold like ten million records, which just can't be done if everybody is thinking either "Hmmm, this is an interesting portrait of a disturbed individual…what an artful statement" or just ignoring the words altogether, which are in your face and high in the mix for the whole album. In addition to chuckling at his clevery wordplay, lots of people are FEELING what Eminem is saying, on some level. They have to be. Maybe they're all just impressionable kids, maybe not. But critics discussing Eminem have not scratched the surface of his appeal, I don't think.

Lauryn Hill - of the little I've heard (just the single I've heard on the MTV, unfortunately) some of it I thought was texturally intriguing, but unfortunately I got really turned off by the gargling, cut-up, jumpy, jerky production style. I know it's ground-breaking and so influential that even Whitney Houston wanted some of it, but the production style really got in the way of the music for me.

Wu-Tang Clan - all the other silliness, the image, the stunts, the idiocy got in the way of my even being able to take them seriously enough to actually listen to what was going on in the music.

Public Enemy - yes, liked them enough to own one of the albums, though it's back in storage so I couldn't tell you which one. In fact, I've seen them live, too. On tour with the Sisters of Mercy of all people (I can just imagine both bands saying to their booking agents "Get me the BLACKEST band that you can find for support" and ending up with each other.) What appealed to me was the beautifully textured sample collage of their music, more than the lyrical content. Sonically interesting music, that's what I'm talking about. Yes.

I don't know. The only thing I can really think is... this *is* just a backlash. Progress, when viewed from above, is not a straight line, but a series of zig-zags that only look like a straight line when viewed from a distance. Backlashes cannot last forever, and if we just keep going, then when it is all over, we'll be a little bit closer to an equilibrium.

Wild MEN with Steak-Knives = Eminem?

During the last few months I've been listening to a lot of Cash Money Records' records, where violence, materialism and misogyny are all present and (in)correct. Needless to say, these records sold extremely well, not just because they did a better job of presenting themselves as more 'real' or 'gangsta' than everyone else (you scared of Lil' Wayne?), but because aggression was not just limited to the lyrics and visuals: Compare Mannie Fresh's Cash Money work or Swizz Beats' production for Jay-Z and DMX with those of Indie rap producers - most of them (except El Producto and a couple of others) just don't cut the mustard. Fresh's beats aren't just 'good': they are the bones of memorable songs, such as the magnificent 'Back That Azz Up'. With a Mannie Fresh produced album, rhythm becomes not king (a recent and hopefully short-lived pop obsession) but adaptable component, all mean and ready for battle.

The 'gangsta' raps themselves are often genuinely witty and clever. They have to be: the ideas that the Hot Boys and the Big Tymers are offering were first spat out by the likes of NWA and (gulp) the 2 Live Crew over a decade ago. Nevertheless, the 'commercial' hiphop (and I mean Juvenile and Jay-Z and not the 'keeping it real' rap-and- scratch of Mobb Deep, C-N-N et al) of the last couple of years has consistently out-imagined and out-thrilled its indie rivals, and attitude's got very little to do with it.

None of this is 'negative', by the way. Unless you're worried for your kids, in which case you had better switch off now.

At what point do I admit defeat?

- a fear of/fascination with my own adolescence and unresolved issues therein which leads me to my current (3 yrs and counting) backlash against 'indie'

- deadly low attention span

Still it just strikes me that the intentions behind IDM records are so suspect. I mean what are these guys trying to do? Do they have any aim? Maybe that's the point I'm missing. I really don't know and frankly I don't want to know.

Also I am fiercely cranky about people's prejudices against dancefloor dance music which I feel will never really be critically recognised, yadda yadda yadda. Also I'm developing a complex over Orbital, Chemical Bros, Underworld/any other popular dance act and it's fans not being 4 real enough to like the club derivatives of these acts.

What else? Jesus now I start I could go on all day......

I'm more talking about the fact that the actual club scene at which Orbital might DJ is mainly centred on singles. And the vast majority of people never hear these singles. They generally have their own appeal independent of the albumdance bands I named. I think it's odd because alot of the singles surface months later, and the ones which don't are still quite catchy. That is to say I'm not talking about some underground thing here, I just think there's genuine potential for more people to hear this music.

I suppose it's a singles versus albums thing.

Me? I guess I'm just not ready to accept poptimism outright. I realise this is frowned upon in IL-circles, but for whatever it's worth I can't understand the appeal behind so-called manufactured pop bands. And yes, I've heard all the reasons why I shouldn't NOT like them ("All bands are commercial", "You enjoy it on its sonic merits" etc) but really I feel most pop (as in Britney or whoever's the top of the charts these days) is aimed at an entirely different demographic from mine. Then again I've come round to the fact ABBA were an incredible band, a band who spawned the girl and boy groups of today and yet no-one has hit quite those emotions since AFAIK.

I'm also quite rubbish when it comes to Garage and Grime - it's not fast or slow enough for this white ass to do anything other than wiggle a bit and then sit back down confused.

I will say, though, that I have a tendency to love things for what I think are purely ironic reasons. Like, I love Meatloaf. I'm not sure if it's because I love "Paradise by the Dashboard Lights" because it's a fucking incredible song, or because it's so cheesy and bombastic that I love it for how bad it is. I honestly don't know - I guess it's probably both. I don't know if that makes me less of a genuine music fan, to like something for how "bad" it is. "My Humps" gives me lots of joy, and I'm pretty sure I only like it because it's so fucking retarded. I'm gonna go with dancing like an idiot in the club over not having fun because I'm not actually "enjoying" the song, though.

in theory I'm a reasonable man. I believe there's no fundamental, objective difference in quality between, say, paris hilton and stravinsky - it all depends on the criteria you use to assess a piece of work.

but beneath the surface I'm a complete snob and I hate pop music. I find grown men obsessing over teeny music such as kelly clarkson or timberlake highly disturbing. I have an instinctively averse reaction to jauntiness. I am disgusted by synchronised dancing. I don't see catchiness as a virtue; quite the opposite. deep down, I suspect that the current vogue among adults for children's music designed by marketing departmetns is a passing hipster fad. please forgive me.

but at the same time I'm a hypocrite. I like a fair amount of adolescent metal. like I said, please forgive me.

I'm bored by repetitive beats and value complexity. therefore dance music and hip hop are closed worlds to me. I have tried, but I have found nothing of worth there. I fear this is an omission, but it's not one I care about. this makes me feel guilty.

I love jazz, noise, heavy prog, hardcore punk, japanese oddities, various 'world' musics and far-out experimental weirdness. I consider pushing the envelope to be a virtue in and of itself. forgive, etc.

I hate so many canonical 'icons' that I wonder whether I hate them simply because they're icons and I'm a contrary git...bowie, dylan, neil young, the stones, the pistols, the clash, madonna, pink floyd, etc, etc. then I wonder if I'm a boring old fart because I like the beatles, the doors and tim buckley. hypocrite. confused hypocrite.

I care far too much about music and nowhere near enough about anything else.

but at the same time I'm a hypocrite. I like a fair amount of adolescent metal. like I said, please forgive me.

YEh, that sums me up pretty much.

would read a Sickest Beat of the month thread

i like that wiz khalifa fella.

just changed my username, thanks.

I like that Wiz Khalifa fella, too.

so i guess its not all new hip hop that i dislike.

YOU GUESSED RIGHT!

scott you never struck me as a hip hop fan.

Scott is an everything fan.

i could listen to more old music, more new music, more music made by people very different to me culturally, more music with a different order of priorities to what i recognise as my preference...but i tend to feel like i do or have done these things to a reasonable extent already tho obv there is always something else to hear/learn/consider theoretically. i do want to do all of those things more but i don't really want to do them based on people's recommendations. instead i want to discover them more 'accidentally' or indirectly and form opinions without reading anything for/against beforehand. something about that is good but something about it also sucks (just as being selfish is often bad but sometimes necessary).

Oddly (or not?) enough, this is pretty much where I'm at at present, at least in general terms. But I also tend to see this in both terms of age as Scott identifies it earlier in this thread combined with a generally much more relaxed philosophy about music (and to a larger extent art and culture, however you want to define it) that I've happily settled into over the past few years. I suspect it was the logical reaction to the overdose of my twenties on such stuff; my thirties was more of a conscious turning away and I'm reaching forty feeling a certain equanimity about it all.

If I tried to keep up with everything I'm 'supposed' to, I would have no time. I really would much rather have relaxed evenings idly reading a book, sometimes listening to music and sometimes not at all. I suppose an earlier self would think that sucks but my current one -- which always liked to do that anyway -- is resolutely unconcerned.

oh yeah there was another thread a bit like this where i said one problem is that i'm letting things like spotify and last.fm have too much control over what i hear and how. i might exclude stuff because it's not immediately available how i want it, i'm listening to some stuff just so it appears higher in my last.fm stats. probably too contrived an approach altho it has been useful as i do get overwhelmed by the choice and need these exercises or motivations to listen sometimes.