Why don't most people love our beloved music?

Turillazzo wrote: I don't like saying that other people are just stupid, but I think that often they don't want to pay enough attention to what they hear. That's simply lazyness.

Well, that hits the core of the problem,but why should people have to strain and gasp to enjoy something?  Heck, that explains the unholy expansion of our beloved prog category to cover all sorts of God-awful things.  We want the lazy stuff we like included too.

Bringing me out of PA retirement for this one.


Music has a purpose, it has a goal. That goal is communication with its listeners. If the music achieves that goal by transmitting the message in an acceptable way the music is considered good. Most people can perceive the goal(s) of a piece of music throughout and react to when the music fails to deliver on its goal. When the music does not achieve its goal(s) it could be considered bad music.

 Pop music delivers its message without a lot of static (so does a lot of classical music actually). "Prog" (whatever that is) tries to hide its message in a lot of nonsensical noodling. So that leaves you with a choice: 1). Wade through the noodlefest to get to the message 2). find music with less distraction/obstacles to the message. Most people choose the later.

With that being said there can be great satisfaction in having to search for the message and yet it can lead to tremendous disappointment.

The second part is the power or depth of the message itself. A Rhianna song that talks about going to the club vs a King Crimson song that transports you to a distant island, where you can feel the waves crashing up the shore, the Seagulls soaring above your head etc etc.. Obviously the message is deeper and more profound on the King Crimson tune while the Rhianna song is more superficial. This is where the Beatles shined the most, they had a knack of creating an ultra complex multilayered message in a pop orientated sound. Their messages were crystal clear but made the listener dig deep not through noodling but pure message content. The Beatles were universal because the messages they communicated were also universal as in they pertained to a shared human experience.

Good music often does have a universal message. Not many people on Earth hate Mozart, this is because the messages he communicated through his music connect with how our brains are designed (hence the Mozart effect talked about in earlier posts). Our brains also work by association, so a person who grew up on Prog music is more inclined to like it purely because the associations made by the brain to pleasurable things when the music was being introduced.

 Other reasons why someone might enjoy otherwise unenjoyable music (by the majorities standards) is because of the feeling of being in a subculture environment. Once again our brains being based on associations, we get a certain feeling (superiority, uniqueness etc...) when we listen to Prog that we enjoy very much although it has nothing to do with the listening process. The brain realizes that it gets a certain cognitive harmony when it associates the music with the outside feeling. Hence you have: Prog = feels good, Prog = feels good. Gangsta rap and Punk rock are notorious scapegoats for this kind of conditioning. So, blah, blah, blah that is enough of the Sociology/Psychology class today.

Long song short about your question:

Music is about how the artist conveys the message, its depth and its clarity.

Music is how we interpret the information and compare it to set brain functions (whoops did not really talk about that much but maybe next time)

Prog or not has a lot to do with how our brain is associative also the impact of classical and operant conditioning.

There is two kinds of music the good and bad. I play the good kind." - Multiple Artists

Personally I think it comes down to this: *any* musical subgenre aside from very mainstream pop is going to be loved by a minority and at best tolerated by the majority. On the flipside, mainstream pop is very specifically pitched to be liked by a large number of people rather than being passionately loved by a few. Go to a metal forum, or a rap forum, or a country forum, or a jazz forum, or a classical forum, or a folk forum, and you'll see this exact same conversation playing out there.

brainstormer wrote: One thing that should always be remembered:  Prog is the closest musical to classical, and classical types of music have stood the test of time.  So, anyone who might be critical and try to put prog in the same place as some other subgenre has to deal with the fact that prog rock in many ways is like classical music.   It's not such a subjective choice for one's music, IMHO.  I wouldn't say that to anyone outside this newsgroup, unless they liked prog.

brainstormer wrote: One thing that should always be remembered:  Prog is the closest musical to classical, and classical types of music have stood the test of time.  So, anyone who might be critical and try to put prog in the same place as some other subgenre has to deal with the fact that prog rock in many ways is like classical music.   It's not such a subjective choice for one's music, IMHO.  I wouldn't say that to anyone outside this newsgroup, unless they liked prog.

It is memorable works of such geniuses like Beethoven that have stood the test of time.  Those 20th century greats who branched out into dissonance and serialism don't seem to have such an universal following. With all due respect, it could be argued that it was at that point that the classical music community got split and the public began to crave for the then more accessible jazz.  When jazz was at its own progressive peak in the 60s, the Beatles-led British invasion is what captured the imagination of larger audiences.  So all the classical and jazz geniuses you may revere are not necessarily very popular.  What stands the test of time is ultimately that is not forgotten and for something not to be forgotten, it should usually have been very popular at the time of its release. Bach-like revivals are unlikely to happen in prog because it is not music that is much dissected or written about by academicians.  Further, people are more wary of criticizing jazz and classical music - not to say nobody does - because it is 'serious business' so you don't find once highly regarded masters torn apart by revisionists but I guarantee that happens a lot in rock and, by implication, prog.

lol

Have you guys ever watched The Truman Show? Amazing movie. Christof, the show director, said that "if he [Truman] was absolutely determined to discover the truth, there's no way we could prevent him". That's the same that happens here. People who listen to "regular" music are happy - like Truman was happy with his fake reality - and it's their right to be. If they ever felt they needed more complex and perhaps even profound music, they would end up discovering prog.  

Edited by Navegador - June 21 2011 at 17:27

 Let's face it: people ain't no good!

Edited by Peter - June 21 2011 at 23:28

Navegador wrote: Have you guys ever watched The Truman Show? Amazing movie. Christof, the show director, said that "if he [Truman] was absolutely determined to discover the truth, there's no way we could prevent him". That's the same that happens here. People who listen to "regular" music are happy - like Truman was happy with his fake reality - and it's their right to be. If they ever felt they needed more complex and perhaps even profound music, they would end up discovering prog.

Pretty much. It's not like prog is completely obscure, after all. Radiohead and Muse have both had massive commercial success lately, and a lot of coverage of them mentions potential prog influences on their work. People like what they like and there's nothing wrong with that.

Peter wrote: In my experience, most people don't love any music, period (least of all complex music). If they don't opt for TV, they will play a dance-oriented satellite radio channel, and mostly ignore it. For most, music is just background noise -- a steady beat to talk over. I honestly believe most people lack the attention spans needed to really listen to music. They hear it, but they don't listen to it much.They are often totally oblivious to the lyrics, for example -- a 50 year old, educated woman I know recently told me that she "loves" Nickleback. "Ever pay attention to their lyrics?" I asked. "They are often very misogynist, very demeaning toward women."  "No," she replied. So, what does she love about them? An angry voice over aggressive music, I guess. A perceived image. Not the reality of lines like "I love you on your knees. I love my hands around your neck. You look so much better with something in your mouth. She's making six figures... she didn't get this far by just shaking hands." (That's right, girls -- prostitution is your road to riches.)   Most people don't read books, or go to see art films, plays, or finely-crafted costume dramas, either. They prefer shows like Jackass, and movies with lots of blood, boobs, and explosions. "Most" people like McDonald's cheeseburgers. Most people prefer Coor's Lite to a tasty, chemical-free, all-natural micro-brewed beer. Most people will not read a news story about the imminent death of the world's oceans, but they'll keep eating shrimp. Most people drive too much, in vehicles that are too big, and burn too much gas. Most people exercise far too little. Many will take up smoking tomorrow, despite having brains. Most people will not change their ways, for the greater good of their planet, and their future. Most people are sheep (tellingly, many will even opt for religions that label them "the flock" and their leaders or saviour figures "shepherds." and thinking too much or acting independently just makes them uncomfortable.   Thus, they get the entertainment, leaders, societies and planet they deserve.   I think it has always been that way, and likely always will.    Oh, to hell with it -- let's take the SUV to Walmart, then McDonald's!

Hey, I haven't seen you post in a while. I'm glad you could spare the time to come back and make what is possibly the most elitist post in this thread so far in case we'd forgotten about your moral superiority while you were gone. 

Navegador wrote: Have you guys ever watched The Truman Show? Amazing movie. Christof, the show director, said that "if he [Truman] was absolutely determined to discover the truth, there's no way we could prevent him". That's the same that happens here. People who listen to "regular" music are happy - like Truman was happy with his fake reality - and it's their right to be. If they ever felt they needed more complex and perhaps even profound music, they would end up discovering prog.

This comparison is absolutely ludicrous.  
 

rogerthat wrote: That's right but especially because prog essentially emerged out of rock, there's some amount of overlap between rock and prog so how prog is projected as to listeners is quite important.  Jazzheads and classical listeners might at least want to have nothing to do with rock in principle but that even knowledgable fans of rock don't necessarily like even a handful of prog rock bands says a lot about how it has been perceived over the years.

I'm not really sure what your second sentence is supposed to mean.