Pinning down your personal taste!

MikeDupont wrote:  After giving it some serious thought....I have come back now to describe why it is that I truly like what I listen to.  I've come up with the theory that people base their music tastes mainly on how the music reflects upon ourselves......let me explain...   When you listen to music...I come up with a few different things that people think about while listening to it   1: to picture the band playing, with their instruments, perhaps live, simply visualizing the guys...   2: Imagining yourself perhaps performing the peace,....playing the instrumets, singing, whatever, and imagining what the audience's reaction would be to you....   3: picturing an image or scene that has nothing to do with say a live performance or the musicians at all...this is were people let the music make them have a "cosmic" experiance or whatever....   Something I totally forgot to mention is that if something doesn't make me want to sing, then forget it - it's not for me - and that doesn't mean that I only like music with singing already in it, or straightforwardly-tuneful things...  So I sometimes daydream a little bit as in your second description! Basically though..music is a translation for people to express their own feelings where words simply can't. This is why people like to share their music with other people, they hope that people will understand them better...which often works.   One of my favorite film directors, Stanely Kubrick, once said that words were a terrible straitjacket. By this he means it is extremely difficult to ever say something you REALLY mean...some emotions simply can't be turned into vocabulary.  However...he did also say that some things can express emotion to another dimension that words can't, and one of these was music. I firmly believe that 'language' is not restricted to words alone... the mind ascribes meaning to all sorts of things-which-are-not-words, and those units of meaning form part of the endless ocean of *relevance* that we are floating about in... music is a huge component of that... yes, I'm aware that I am rambling... pay no attention... lalalala...   So when I don't feel like trying to explain something with everything coming out as a mumbly mess, I use the music to help sort my thaughts...for myself and others.   And than of course some poeple listen to music cause it sounds good and they want to dance :P Oh, yes!  Dancing.  Absolutely!  Just try and stop me.  And that goes for wedding reception cheese as much as it does for epic 'suites' in oddball time signatures...   Share your thaughts.....forgive me for any bad spelling :P

song_of_copper wrote: MikeDupont wrote: How could I have forgoten? Perhaps the most diciplined band of them all.. CAN!  Another very perceptive suggestion...  I have to say that I've rather avoided Krautrock up till now - there seems to be so much of it, and I get weary thinking about the vastness of it...  Still, at least now I know where to start, if the urge takes me!

Can are fantastic indeed.  I started with Tago Mago, which may or may not be a good choice.  Now that I am more experienced, I think that Soundtracks might be the best starting place.  It demonstrates the styles of Malcom Mooney and Damo Suzuki Can, which are very different.  It's also relatively accessible compared to the rest of their discography, Future Days would be good if you want something more mellowed out and electric.  Tago Mago is one of my favorite albums ever though, so many musical horizons packed in the double LP, I believe they could have expanded any one of those songs and made it into an entire album in itself.  From the ominous chanting on Augmn, the psychedelic landscapes of Paperhouse, the pure weirdness of Peking O, etc.... don't want to ramble.

Neu! and Amon Duul II are other obvious recommendations.  Neu! is more electronic sounding, Amon Duul II is more psychedelic.  Avoid Neu! 2 at first, since the debut and 75 are much better.  For Amon Duul, I find Phallus Dei to be their best work, Yeti and Tanz der Lemminge contained a bit too much improv jamming for my liking at first, plus as double albums they took longer to digest.  Wolf City is accessible, catchy at times in fact, that might be a good place to start although Phallus Dei is a better idea of Krautrock.

If you like more electronic, check out Popol Vuh's first two albums or Tangerine Dream.  If you want more psychedelic, look into Ash Ra Temple or Agitation Free.  I LOVE Faust's debut, but it's one of the weirdest things I've heard, check out the sample "Why Don't We Eat Carrots".  So Far is still weird but not nearly as much, the sample represented on PA is sort of Velvet Underground-esque and catchy (to me, but I find weird things catchy and pop stuff easy to forget about mostly).

A.R. and the Machines are another one of my favorites, but they're a bit more obscure.  I reviewed their first two albums if you want to check them out (I don't review much - my earlier ones are embarassing), I actually have Die Gruene Reise on vinyl which costed around $35 but was well worth it.  Echo is my favorite kraut album along with Tago Mago.  I think Die Gruene Reise is their only album with a legit CD issue, you'll probably have to download them illegally (unless you buy a non-legit CD copy or the LPs, which isn't likely since they go from $50-$250 (Echo).

Discovering Krautrock was one of my favorite periods in musical exploration, and I've had quite a few.  But like a lot of smalelr music genres, once you reach a certain point, there becomes little to find besides obscure bands, which generally are obscure for a reason (some pleasant exceptions arise, of course).  Interestingly enough, there are quite a few modern "kraut revival" type bands that I plan on looking into soon.

Anyway, that's enough typing for now, I don't think I've typed that much in a single post in ages. :P


Edited by Bluesaga - June 17 2008 at 19:16

Still thinking...for now let's just say my taste is whatever James and Dylan tell me to listen to.  

Bluesaga wrote: song_of_copper wrote: MikeDupont wrote: How could I have forgoten? Perhaps the most diciplined band of them all.. CAN!  Another very perceptive suggestion...  I have to say that I've rather avoided Krautrock up till now - there seems to be so much of it, and I get weary thinking about the vastness of it...  Still, at least now I know where to start, if the urge takes me! Can are fantastic indeed.  I started with Tago Mago, which may or may not be a good choice.  Now that I am more experienced, I think that Soundtracks might be the best starting place.  It demonstrates the styles of Malcom Mooney and Damo Suzuki Can, which are very different.  It's also relatively accessible compared to the rest of their discography, Future Days would be good if you want something more mellowed out and electric.  Tago Mago is one of my favorite albums ever though, so many musical horizons packed in the double LP, I believe they could have expanded any one of those songs and made it into an entire album in itself.  From the ominous chanting on Augmn, the psychedelic landscapes of Paperhouse, the pure weirdness of Peking O, etc.... don't want to ramble. Helpful detail - thank you!  I must say that where 'musical entry points' are concerned, I'm steadfastly of the 'plunge right in to the most outrageous/representative/best stuff first' school... 'easing in gently' doesn't work too well for me, somehow.  Still not sure whether I'm going to like this, though... we'll see! Neu! and Amon Duul II are other obvious recommendations.  Neu! is more electronic sounding, Amon Duul II is more psychedelic.  Avoid Neu! 2 at first, since the debut and 75 are much better.  For Amon Duul, I find Phallus Dei to be their best work, Yeti and Tanz der Lemminge contained a bit too much improv jamming for my liking at first, plus as double albums they took longer to digest.  Wolf City is accessible, catchy at times in fact, that might be a good place to start although Phallus Dei is a better idea of Krautrock. Coincidentally, I downloaded Neu! just the other day.  My first impression was something like, "hmm, this is quite pleasant... now, what's with all these water-gurgling noises..." - note to self: next time, concentrate, don't try to read, think and listen to unfamiliar music at the same time! [snip!] Anyway, that's enough typing for now, I don't think I've typed that much in a single post in ages. :P Thanks again, it was an interesting read!

Interesting.

Very interesting thread. I think it's about time I weighed in my 2 cents.

My father showed me Rush roughly four years ago; before that I always liked music but wasn't heavily involved with it. After I got into Rush (through their 80s albums and 2112, actually), it's been quite a roller coaster ever since, and music is definitely my passion. Over time I've increasingly become more and more open to different kinds of music, but I'd say music has to have some sort of recognizable substance (many others here would agree), or else I won't enjoy it.

More specifically, my top 5 include: Rush, Magma, Frank Zappa, Ozric Tentacles, and King Crimson. So I'd say my all-time favorites are open to quite a spectrum, but the music has to be dynamic. The only two prog bands I've really grown out of (that I used to love) have been Pink Floyd and The Moody Blues, so I'd say once I really did find my taste I like music that is incredibly unique, dynamic, and has some degree of at least substantial musicianship. Other bands I love though range from Meshuggah to 3 to Return to Forever to Kansas to Henry Cow, so I'd say when it comes to an actual "sub-genre" I'm not really biased.

To me, listening to music is like undergoing a completely innovative, pre-constructed "journey" that the composer(s) constructed with certain emotions, thoughts, and structures in mind. It's almost like a process of transposing your current reality and trying to completely immerse yourself in the art. If music is truly worth my time, it will make me feel and think outside of a box that I have before. The more that music strikes me personally, the more that I'll enjoy it.

A great example of this is Frank Zappa, of whom I'm definitely an infinitely large fanboy. I love how he put all of his constant soul, thoughts, and emotions into his music and really stretched the pre-conceived idea of what music has to be "contained" in. I love expressing new boundaries of musical expression, and Frank never lets me down. He takes everything in his life incredibly seriously, but he also knew when to have fun, use wonderful satire, and his music is the absolute perfect blend of a great, humorous, yet simultaneously serious and thought-provoking look on life. In summary, the music has to be intellectually stimulating, fresh, and full of emotions and what I call the "soul" of the artist. I'll only enjoy music if I believe I can almost have a conversation with whoever is playing the instruments and created the music. Thankfully, since I came across this site about three years ago, I've found that there are seemingly endless loads of music that can fulfill that.

Well, enough of my rambling; someone make sense of that.

MovingPictures07 wrote: Very interesting thread. I think it's about time I weighed in my 2 cents. Thanks, your cents (both of 'em) are much appreciated! My father showed me Rush roughly four years ago; before that I always liked music but wasn't heavily involved with it. After I got into Rush (through their 80s albums and 2112, actually), it's been quite a roller coaster ever since, and music is definitely my passion. Over time I've increasingly become more and more open to different kinds of music, but I'd say music has to have some sort of recognizable substance (many others here would agree), or else I won't enjoy it. 'Substance': that's an interesting word.  And quite open to interpretation.  But I guess you mean that 'disposable' music - half-hearted music, indeed - is not for you.  I have to say I agree. More specifically, my top 5 include: Rush, Magma, Frank Zappa, Ozric Tentacles, and King Crimson. So I'd say my all-time favorites are open to quite a spectrum, but the music has to be dynamic. The only two prog bands I've really grown out of (that I used to love) have been Pink Floyd and The Moody Blues, so I'd say once I really did find my taste I like music that is incredibly unique, dynamic, and has some degree of at least substantial musicianship. Other bands I love though range from Meshuggah to 3 to Return to Forever to Kansas to Henry Cow, so I'd say when it comes to an actual "sub-genre" I'm not really biased. Well, we have two of our top five in common.  And they are probably the top two for me.  And the two who most strike a very personal chord with me... Dynamic is a good word also.  Range and drama in music attracts me greatly too. Y'know, I should probably keep my mouth shut on this, but I really don't like Pink Floyd.  Not that I think their music is bad, exactly - but it makes me feel creepy.  I can't stand to hear it, physically or psychologically...  Unfortunately, it's my boyfriend's favourite band.  Meanwhile, he loathes Magma - for exactly the same reason!  It's a happy home... To me, listening to music is like undergoing a completely innovative, pre-constructed "journey" that the composer(s) constructed with certain emotions, thoughts, and structures in mind. It's almost like a process of transposing your current reality and trying to completely immerse yourself in the art. If music is truly worth my time, it will make me feel and think outside of a box that I have before. The more that music strikes me personally, the more that I'll enjoy it. That's a pretty good description.  I don't think it's possible to truly enjoy music without some kind of empathy - you have to care about the 'journey' you're being taken on I suppose - and the best moments in music, for me, are the ones when you feel like the composer read your mind. A great example of this is Frank Zappa, of whom I'm definitely an infinitely large fanboy. I love how he put all of his constant soul, thoughts, and emotions into his music and really stretched the pre-conceived idea of what music has to be "contained" in. I love expressing new boundaries of musical expression, and Frank never lets me down. He takes everything in his life incredibly seriously, but he also knew when to have fun, use wonderful satire, and his music is the absolute perfect blend of a great, humorous, yet simultaneously serious and thought-provoking look on life. In summary, the music has to be intellectually stimulating, fresh, and full of emotions and what I call the "soul" of the artist. I'll only enjoy music if I believe I can almost have a conversation with whoever is playing the instruments and created the music. Thankfully, since I came across this site about three years ago, I've found that there are seemingly endless loads of music that can fulfill that. Nuff said.  Frank Zappa made the impossible look easy, whilst never obscuring the sheer effort he put into everything.  And I love that combination of imaginative flights of fancy with practical common sense.  I'm probably a little spoiled by having FZ as my musical yardstick... yet another reason for 'quality over quantity' on my CD and LP shelves!  [Edit... duh... NOT 'quantity over quality'... ] Again I like what you say about 'having a conversation' with the musicians - oh yes, you've got to feel the uniqueness, and the genuineness, coming across!  Absolutely. In fact, I forgot to put in my original post that PERSONALITY is a big deal for me in music.  Not that I can't listen to music made by boring people, but I only ever really get absorbed in music which is made by people who intrigue me.  It helps to have that tangible humanity there, as you say.  And really, nothing bores me more than people taking a kind of pride in their own 'averageness'.  Give me a vain, flamboyant genius any day!  In fact, give me at least two, so I can feel really spoiled! Well, enough of my rambling; someone make sense of that. I enjoyed your rambling sir!  Well rambled indeed!

Edited by song_of_copper - June 23 2008 at 17:22

song_of_copper wrote: MovingPictures07 wrote: Very interesting thread. I think it's about time I weighed in my 2 cents. Thanks, your cents (both of 'em) are much appreciated! No problem. My father showed me Rush roughly four years ago; before that I always liked music but wasn't heavily involved with it. After I got into Rush (through their 80s albums and 2112, actually), it's been quite a roller coaster ever since, and music is definitely my passion. Over time I've increasingly become more and more open to different kinds of music, but I'd say music has to have some sort of recognizable substance (many others here would agree), or else I won't enjoy it. 'Substance': that's an interesting word.  And quite open to interpretation.  But I guess you mean that 'disposable' music - half-hearted music, indeed - is not for you.  I have to say I agree. Yes, entirely. I will not listen to music that I think was half-hearted or music that simply copies what has been done before... that being said, I'm really open to anything. More specifically, my top 5 include: Rush, Magma, Frank Zappa, Ozric Tentacles, and King Crimson. So I'd say my all-time favorites are open to quite a spectrum, but the music has to be dynamic. The only two prog bands I've really grown out of (that I used to love) have been Pink Floyd and The Moody Blues, so I'd say once I really did find my taste I like music that is incredibly unique, dynamic, and has some degree of at least substantial musicianship. Other bands I love though range from Meshuggah to 3 to Return to Forever to Kansas to Henry Cow, so I'd say when it comes to an actual "sub-genre" I'm not really biased. Well, we have two of our top five in common.  And they are probably the top two for me.  And the two who most strike a very personal chord with me... Dynamic is a good word also.  Range and drama in music attracts me greatly too. Y'know, I should probably keep my mouth shut on this, but I really don't like Pink Floyd.  Not that I think their music is bad, exactly - but it makes me feel creepy.  I can't stand to hear it, physically or psychologically...  Unfortunately, it's my boyfriend's favourite band.  Meanwhile, he loathes Magma - for exactly the same reason!  It's a happy home... Well, I'm glad I found someone else. I liked them 3 or 4 years ago, but I don't like them at all anymore. Saying that out loud on here though is like going in the middle of a really rough neighbourhood and purposefully picking out fights. You might just get shot. To me, listening to music is like undergoing a completely innovative, pre-constructed "journey" that the composer(s) constructed with certain emotions, thoughts, and structures in mind. It's almost like a process of transposing your current reality and trying to completely immerse yourself in the art. If music is truly worth my time, it will make me feel and think outside of a box that I have before. The more that music strikes me personally, the more that I'll enjoy it. That's a pretty good description.  I don't think it's possible to truly enjoy music without some kind of empathy - you have to care about the 'journey' you're being taken on I suppose - and the best moments in music, for me, are the ones when you feel like the composer read your mind. (nothing to add, perfectly stated) A great example of this is Frank Zappa, of whom I'm definitely an infinitely large fanboy. I love how he put all of his constant soul, thoughts, and emotions into his music and really stretched the pre-conceived idea of what music has to be "contained" in. I love expressing new boundaries of musical expression, and Frank never lets me down. He takes everything in his life incredibly seriously, but he also knew when to have fun, use wonderful satire, and his music is the absolute perfect blend of a great, humorous, yet simultaneously serious and thought-provoking look on life. In summary, the music has to be intellectually stimulating, fresh, and full of emotions and what I call the "soul" of the artist. I'll only enjoy music if I believe I can almost have a conversation with whoever is playing the instruments and created the music. Thankfully, since I came across this site about three years ago, I've found that there are seemingly endless loads of music that can fulfill that. Nuff said.  Frank Zappa made the impossible look easy, whilst never obscuring the sheer effort he put into everything.  And I love that combination of imaginative flights of fancy with practical common sense.  I'm probably a little spoiled by having FZ as my musical yardstick... yet another reason for 'quality over quantity' on my CD and LP shelves!  [Edit... duh... NOT 'quantity over quality'... ] Again I like what you say about 'having a conversation' with the musicians - oh yes, you've got to feel the uniqueness, and the genuineness, coming across!  Absolutely. In fact, I forgot to put in my original post that PERSONALITY is a big deal for me in music.  Not that I can't listen to music made by boring people, but I only ever really get absorbed in music which is made by people who intrigue me.  It helps to have that tangible humanity there, as you say.  And really, nothing bores me more than people taking a kind of pride in their own 'averageness'.  Give me a vain, flamboyant genius any day!  In fact, give me at least two, so I can feel really spoiled! Personality is a huge factor for me too (what the hell, it's almost like you read my freaking mind ), and I love experiencing the wide array of different personalities that I call my favorites. Being a drummer, the fact that my idols are Neil Peart, Christian Vander, and Bill Bruford says that I'm pretty open-minded, but it's also an indication that they all have vibrant personalities when they're playing (for me, anyway, I feel like I can fully connect with them when they're playing their music). If an artist can't "connect" to me with a personal touch in the music, it's not bound to reach my favorites. Well, enough of my rambling; someone make sense of that. I enjoyed your rambling sir!  Well rambled indeed! Thank you. It's what I do.

...and just hope they're dumb enough to aim for the vest

Edited by darqDean - June 24 2008 at 15:12

darqDean wrote:   it's okay not to like Floyd, or any band - all tastes are different.

Haha, never were there more true words, but I sometimes wonder if people realize that...

I'm generally pretty open-minded to any type/sub-genre of progressive music, but PF doesn't do it for me anymore. I had the same thing happen with The Moody Blues... And also, when I first heard Spock's Beard I liked them alot too, but that wore off pretty quickly. The Flower Kings are more my type for that kind of stuff, but I always recognize the impact and position of the bands, despite that they just aren't as much to my taste.

But being a huge Porcupine Tree fan, whenever I find someone else who is as well, they'll ask me if I like Pink Floyd. I'll say that "I used to, but don't really listen to them anymore", and they'll give me the most bizarre looks. It's great.

EDIT: Typo. I'm way too perfectionist about these things.


Edited by MovingPictures07 - June 24 2008 at 15:54