Music confuses and intimidates me

I don't get how certain music becomes regarded as great and others become punchlines or objects of ridicule in pop culture and on the Internet. It doesn't help that (on the Internet especially) taste in music is treated as an indicator of one's intelligence/culture (or lack thereof) with "right" and "wrong" answers, and that you're expected to know where a given piece fits on a spectrum between good and bad. I don't know how it all works, and I get the feeling that I'm expected to know how it works intuitively or else there's something wrong with me.

TL;DR — I don't know how to determine music quality, and I'm worried about getting it wrong.

I don't get it either. I don't think anyone gets it. It's all accidents of pop culture history—certain songs just happened to be at the right place at the right time to catch on.

Also: subcultures.

I've been guilty of that attitude in the past but I try to eschew that thought process now. I think it's more important that a person exposes him/herself to a wide variety of music and can articulate why they like or don't like it. Understanding where a particular genre or musician fits into music's history can also help.

Start with the musicians you like, and do some research to find out who they were inspired/influenced by, and give them a listen. Use professional reviews as a resource—if necessary, ignore the value judgements and focus on the description of objective elements like genre and who they sound like. Understand also that any reviewer, no matter how respected, can be factually wrong.

If you believe Sturgeon's Law, then 90% of all music is crap... and 90% of all music listeners are also crap, and their opinions can be safely ignored. The trick is finding those good opinions.

You like what you like. Simple.

To pity someone is to tell them "I feel bad about being better than you."

I'm not so sure it's that simple. Why does there seems to be a rough consensus about what's good among critic types? What makes something a classic? I'm almost convinced that there's SOME sort of system to it all.

Which 10% should I trust though? Who are these all-knowing arbiters?

edited 27th Oct '13 4:16:06 PM by ntico

OK, maybe this will help get at what I'm worried about: people (especially online) imply that smart people like X and not-so-smart people like Y, and that they are drawn to their respective types as a result of their intelligence/culturedness/worth. I'm worried that I'm in the latter group.

Can you name some artists/bands you like? Regardless of how well-known or not they are.

Alright, if you insist:

Queen, Aphex Twin

How's that for a start? It's what I'm willing to list at the moment.

edited 27th Oct '13 5:22:01 PM by ntico

I don't think too many people would ridicule you for those.

For we shall slay evil with logic...

/mu/ probably would. Queen would make me a You Tube dadrocker, and Aphex Twin would be "babby's first electronic." And I'd be a stupid pleb idiot masses member or some such nonsense.

Especially Aphex Twin, who is not well known by most people and is respected by many critics, including classical music critics.

It's just an image board, and lots of people on the internet like to think of themselves as know-it-all, heard-it-all smartasses.

edited 27th Oct '13 6:07:16 PM by Quag15

It's not just /mu/. There's a real tendency (especially online) to treat liking anything known by more than ten people as some sort of unforgivable sin. There's a real aversion to anything remotely considered "mainstream" online, and I don't entirely share this sentiment (and thus I fear that I'm some sort of easily amused fool, or "everything wrong with modern society," or [insert disparaging label or remark]).

edited 27th Oct '13 6:16:01 PM by ntico

Like I said, "lots of people on the internet".

In terms of hipsters and non-hipsters and other categories of music lovers, I suppose it's mostly about finding the right circles.

I don't think people who dismiss things just because they're popular are generally taken very seriously. Yeah, there are artists like Nickelback and Billy Ray Cyrus that people will give you flak for listening to, but it's more of a quality issue.

Maybe try a forum like digitaldreamdoor.com, where people discuss music from all degrees of popularity/ obscurity.

For we shall slay evil with logic...

It's very hard finding a circle of music lovers where you would fit in. Believe me, I've searched low and high, and eventually gave up on trying to find such a place (and a lot of other online communities that I could possibly fit in: not worth the effort, in my opinion).

Honestly? Music confuses and intimidates me too. At least, how people rank their fellow music listeners in "good taste" and "bad taste". While there's no denying some people will give you flack no matter what for listening to a certain artist, I personally think that it doesn't matter in the end. Say what you will about a group or musician that you hate, but judging others for their taste just seems wrong. Yes, some artists are legitimately bad, but if people can find sincere enjoyment in them, what's so wrong with that? If they aren't being obnoxious about it, let them have their fun.

This isn't really about music itself, so much as worrying that I'm part of some nebulously defined group of "idiot masses."

I just really dislike how online communities and fandom can turn into an "us vs. them" affair at times, where those not in the group are made out to be inferior or threatening or something like that.

edited 27th Oct '13 8:06:11 PM by ntico

My take on this: if someones thinks less of you because you like/don't like something they don't/do, that's their problem. Not yours.

Hell, this doesn't just apply to music. The whole "you like/don't like something I don't/do so you're an idiot" is just a terrible and pompous attitude to have in general.

To pity someone is to tell them "I feel bad about being better than you."

This.

Don't worry about such shallow judgements. The key thing is to listen to quality stuff, regardless of the mainstream, the alternative, the underground, and the genre.

edited 27th Oct '13 9:14:58 PM by Quag15

The answer is simple. Spend at least 3 years listening to nothing but mainstream pop. Then spend 5 years listening to ALL KINDS OF OTHER STUFF, regardless of genre or origin.

That is how I acquired musical taste.

My angry rant blog!

I admit I've gotten angry over pop music. It continually strives to be more shitty, to produce more records for less.

I'm a skeptical squirrel

That's how the music industry in general has always worked since its inception, quantity over quality. Doesn't mean quality works don't slip in there from time to time, though, and those are what people usually remember from an era. But that's another discussion

You trying to tell me it isn't?

While I admit I can be an elitist douche about music sometimes, honestly, if I were you I would just try to stop worrying about being judged by these kinds of people. They have an immature mindset if they look down upon someone simply for the kinds of music they like. Just listen to what appeals to you, and give a big hearty "SCREW YOU" to anyone who objects. Hell, I'm one of the biggest music snobs around, and I'm sure tons of people could pick at a huge portion of my music library. People are finicky, picky, and judgemental by nature—it's not worth it to get worked up over that. If you're afraid of people judging you, especially over such inconsequential things, you're never gonna get anywhere in life.

And regarding things that critics tend to agree is "the best", they tend to talk up things that are highly influential to the music people have made since and/or the culture of the time (e.g. The Beatles, the Velvet Underground, Madonna); have had long-lasting popularity, well-past the point that anyone could've predicted; or even simply are technically good from a music theory perspective and from the perspective of how well they play their instruments. Doesn't mean you have to like this music, but for things in the first category, it's at least important to understand the contributions they made that have impacted the music you hear now. (For example, you know how nowadays songs in them are often so complex and have so many layers upon layers upon layers? Might have never happened if not for the Beatles' innovations in multitrack recording.) It is possible to understand why something is well-regarded while still having a dislike for it, and vice versa.

TL;DR: Stop worrying about what others think and have your own opinions, dammit!

edited 27th Oct '13 11:24:13 PM by Odd1

Insert witty 'n clever quip here.

Maybe /mu/ is "babby's first music criticism".

(P.S. I haven't actually been to /mu/; just working off what I've heard secondhand.)

There is a secret cave, high in the Andes mountains. Go into that cave, and an ancient guru, descended from the Incan priest caste, will greet you. Offer him a suitable sacrifice to the god Supay, and he will tell you the locations of six secret groves, each the only known location of a different rare flower breed. Collect blooms from all six. Then, at night, under the light of a half-moon, you must eat all of the blooms, while listening to a single song. (Any song will do, except country or rap.) Your mind, soul, and spirit will all depart from your body and go on separate journeys.

Your mind will meet an angel in the guise of T-Bone Burnett and travel to the Library of Babel, where you will read about everyone who has ever touched an instrument, and how much influence they have had. You will not be permitted to leave the Library until you pass a test on the information; fortunately, the test is multiple-choice.

Your soul will meet an angel in the guise of Tito Puente, who will give you soul a spool of yarn and a pair of giant novelty marimba mallets. You will use the yarn to navigate the treacherous Maze of Genres. You will use the mallets to defend yourself against the foul spirits who inhabit this maze: Incompetence, Technique, Derivation, Novelty, Pretension, Ignorance, Gravity, Levity, Popularity, and Obscurity. At the end of the maze you will find a key.

Your spirit will meet an angel in the guise of Flavor Flav, who will give you the Eight Shards of Insight. Under his tutelage, you will forge them into a fearsome Sword and wield it like the mighty heroes of old.

When these three tasks are complete, your mind, soul, and spirit will re-merge, and your final task will begin. On the volcanic peak of Mount Chorus, you will confront a dragon with the faces of Robert Christgau, Mark Prindle, and Piero Scaruffi. You will best the dragon, both physically and intellectually, and he will give you permission to take one piece of treasure from his hoard. One locked treasure chest will call for you—you will know with all of your being that the treasure inside this chest is what you've been looking for. The key from the Maze of Genres will unlock this chest. You will lift the lid and find an obsidian mirror. You will gaze into its depths and realize the truth:

The music critic was inside you all along.

(You'll have to take the cab to get your mind/soul/spirit back into your body. If you don't have money for the fare, Flavor Flav can float you some.)

Why care what other people think? The only real judge of music's quality is how much you enjoy it, and how much lasting appeal it has for you.

I'm so sorry that my avatar doesn't appear fully in the shot, but the cat was threatening the photographer.

To pity someone is to tell them "I feel bad about being better than you."

/mu/ really isn't music criticism, it's just typical 4chan ilk combined with pitchfork(which they all swear they don't follow but they do).

"I could eat a knob at night" - Karl Pilkington