'I don't get it'

HI,

(cont'd) ... regardless of how we see it as one thing or another.

Hi,

For the longest time, that was my way of listening to things, with one slight difference. When it comes to "progressive" I had already heard many of the early things by many of the bands ... thus, I was already onto the chronological order of things. Now, here comes joke time ... are you going to listen to 8 full Symphonies before you get to Beethoven's 9th? ... I DOUBT IT! You'll get bored because not all of the Symphonies are "dynamic like the 5th (start mostly) and the 9th, as is well known.

But there were some things onto the 90's and beyond that I did not bother with listening. I do not dislike DT, but never saw the point of listening to their earlier stuff, and in fact, I didn't enjoy it much. But other than that, Porcupine Tree started for me with the SIGNIFY album and I went forward several albums before I got the earlier stuff.

It is a good rule for folks learning about the music itself, but (in general) not exactly a good idea ... one can listen to Genesis from the beginning, and will get to the end, and go ... wtf? And the same for other bands.

Some bands I can listen to but are not my favorites. Rush is one of them ... as roomates in the mid/late 70's had their albums, but while nice, I was already full blast into the Europeans, and I did not think that Rush was as great as Banco, PFM. Le Orme, Ange, AD2, Can and so on ... and all of those I was there on the first album.

Listening habits today are tough ... I don't know that suggesting 10 albums (from the start, let's say) is a good idea ... folks mostly listen to 4-5 minute jingles (as I call them) and often times, many of the favored albums, are all song related in the same time frame (or thereabouts) and format ... but in our case, things change, and sometimes harshly ... which is not good for someone just learning about a band or "progressive".

I looked up :v, I guessed it was sarcastic or ironic. For any who may not know (which quite likely is no one at the forum), j/k equals just kidding.  I usually use ;) for j/k.  Like with other categories, there's avant prog I like and dislike and everyone to their own tastes.

I have seen such statements from people and is quite annoying; very arrogant.  I wish more people would talk about the qualities they appreciate in music without telling another how they should appreciate music.  What music sounds good and evokes the right emotions is in the ear of the behearer. I have had people on the more melodic rock side tell me that what I like is bad and just noise and no one should like it  just to try to annoy me in some cases).  I loathe such attitudes.  There are those who do seem to forget that music appreciation is subjective and no two people appreciate music in precisely the same way.  We all bring in our own psyches, experiences, associations.... I will appreciate certain music at one time and not appreciate it at another depending on mood and other factors. And some music I had to find the right stepping stones to appreciate, and with other music I lost interest over time. I do think one can appreciate the qualities of music without necessarily liking the music, but that's another thing. While I do think there is good and bad music (at least following certain principles) I wish less people talked about music as if it is good or bad and would be less apt to confuse personal preference with objective goodness.  I care about if music is good for me more than if it good writ large. Some music resonates with me particularly well at certain times and might not have resonated before being exposed to music that led me there and primed me.  Enjoy the journey, everyone's is different.  I don't want to be told what I "should" like and how I "should" appreciate it.