Get To Know A Top 10: January 2019 Thread - Tap - Music

Tha1ChiefRocka
Yeah, well hey, I'm really sorry.

Location: Kansas

Tap wrote:

Oh I just realized some of those sounds Fischman mentioned on Fenn O'Berg may have been from the Japanese bonus track Adidas Sun Tanned Avant Man that is now included with this album. I strongly recommend people leave that off and stick with the original tracklist, it feels sort of tacked on and unnecessary/unnecessarily harsh.

Where should I listen to it? I've only been able to find two tracks on the old youtube, which is why I've never listened to it yet.

Tap
to resume download

Gender: Female
Age: 38

It got reissued with the first album so it's in that for Spotify

https://open.spotify.com/album/5DXQVyZy1PQ9soYdmKeYSX

Floating My Boat thru We Will Diffuse You.

Or did you need it on a non-spotify source?

Tha1ChiefRocka
Yeah, well hey, I'm really sorry.

Location: Kansas

Nope, Spotify is just fine.

Edit: NVM, it's not fine for some reason. That album doesn't show up for me when I go to their artist page, and I can't click on any of those songs to play. My spotify is broken Sad

Fischman
RockMonster, JazzMeister, Bluesboy,ClassicalMaster

Gender: Male
Location: Land of Enchantment

Skinny wrote:

Fischman wrote:

Skinny wrote:

Fischman wrote:

Think you for perfectly understanding my intent in saying those things. Really, that was my whole point, that this is not my type of music, but I was able to appreciate it nonetheless.

To all the others who felt the need to get bent, realize that those things were tongue in cheek, not meant to be definitive statements of reality or absolutes in any way. That's why I asked you to read the whole thing before coming back with your very predictable responses. Hopefully you would recognize someone getting one of the best possible benefits from BEA, deliberately seeking things outside his comfort zone and, as a result, expanding his musical horizons. But no, true to form, you chose to misinterpret the intro in the worst possible light and cling to that throughout, thus allowing you to ignore the more relevant and important conclusion and cue up your snarky responses (which weren't nearly as clever as I suspect you think they are).

"I am cleverer than you all, stupid dumdums. You misinterpret everything I say because you are too simple to grasp my meaning. Despite the fact that my initial statements were offensively dismissive (which is my default setting, though I refuse to admit it), I will just say that they were oversimplifications and that you all fell into my trap, thus absolving myself of any responsibility whilst once again claiming superiority over you."

Anyway, lovely Syro write-up, Tap. I wasn't aware that the songs had been played back in ambient spaces and re-recorded, but it certainly explains the record's warmth. (I have the album on vinyl, somewhere, but clearly never paid enough attention to the sleeve, which is a lovely foldout number.) I haven't spun Syro in a while, though I listened to it a lot when it first came out, and I remember thinking of it as being prog-funk, almost; super dense, but also really accessible and squelchy, like Hancock's Headhunters filtered through DeepDream. I know that's an oversimplification of an album that goes in many directions, but it's my overriding memory. I probably only prefer SAWII and Surfing On Sine Waves from his catalogue, but the fact that all three are so very different is a testament to the man, whose career you summarised nicely.

And truer to form than any, you're ignorance and whatever else prompts you to be a jackass brings you in right on cue.

There was no "trap" here. The bulk of the post was dedicated to how I came to appreciate the album despite my biases going in. That's pretty explicit, not a trap and not designed to provoke a certain response. Context and conclusion were clear. But of course, your pathetic day isn't complete unless you can attack me for something so ya' gotta' manufacture some perceived slight to justify your rant. Gawd, man, get over yourself.

The reason you rub people up the wrong way - one of them, anyway - is that you are unwilling (or incapable) of presenting a negative opinion on something without belittling it and, by extension, those that enjoy it. You might be a lovely person in real life, but your internet discourse is dismissive to the point of (seemingly deliberate) provocation. You could have just said that you weren't particularly au fait with/fond of hip-hop or sampling, but you felt the need to wilfully insult those art forms - reducing rapping to talking, equating sampling with theft, and implying the use of electronic instruments is somehow worth less than that of "real" instruments, whatever that means - before becoming defensive when others became understandably provoked. You then claimed that said responses were "predictable", which means that they were clearly avoidable, and yet you chose not to avoid them. You want to provoke people, and then play the victim when people become provoked, all the while claiming to have been uniformly misinterpreted whilst implying that you are the smartest person in the room. It's an exhausting form of discourse.

Anyway, apologies to Tap for in any way derailing your thread. Again, top Syro writeup.

Well, I know typing on the internet doesn't communicate the sly twist in the corner of my mouth or the twinkle in my eye that makes people in person laugh at my jabs and spar back with equally good natured jabs. Okay. But even in the absence of those nonverbals, why assume the worst? People are far too quick to take offense. It's no wonder you falsely assume me of deliberately wanting to provoke people... you're very quick to jump to false conclusions in general (like labeling me a prog snob even though I love and praise a wide variety of music).

One need not extrapolate "by extension." If I say a piece of music is simple minded, that does not imply that "by extension" I'm saying anyone who listens to it is simple minded. I know some positively brilliant people who listen to simple music. I've never implied theres a correlation between complexity of music enjoyed and traits of the listener. I've had bosses, much smarter or more successful than me who listen to country!! (yeah, there I go again, but hopefully you get the point. I know awesome people who have no musical acumen whatsoever.

I could refer you to a thread I posted in on the Movies and TV board. Someone responded to my post starting with "Christ..." and went on to tirade against my selections. He went so far to say (directly even, not by implication or by extension) that anyone who had my preferences was "a simpleton." Now if I'm some sort or arrogant snob, wouldn't directly calling me a simpleton be the ultimate insult? And yet I didn't take it personally, get bent, or feel the need to retaliate against that poster. We're cool. I was enriched by his statements as they helped my gain an understanding of the topic I previously lacked.

Fischman
RockMonster, JazzMeister, Bluesboy,ClassicalMaster

Gender: Male
Location: Land of Enchantment

Re: Jacques Lejune

I was able to sink my teeth into this one right from the get go. I dont know if it will stay at the top of this heap as I give extra listens to the others on the list, but my introductory listen has me impressed. The combination of the large scale composition across the individual pieces and the variety of sounds along with how they're juxtaposed has me intrigued.

Tap
to resume download

Gender: Female
Age: 38

The perception of snobbery is an issue I have been very interested in lately. I think things like the argument in this thread are really a generational issue. And I was coming up right at the transition, I can remember saving up money to buy cd's, and I can remember the early days of downloading, when suddenly you had less and less of an excuse to not listen to something you hear about as the speeds increased. I believe this gives me a pretty balanced perspective on the issue.

In the past, when you would have characters on TV who were really into music, there would usually be some kind of accompanying identity to go along with it. Punks, Goths, B-Boys, etc. But now you have this Pitchfork article asking "How Does the First Grader on Big Little Lies Have Such Killer Music Taste?"

The reason for this is that when we got to that point where the only barrier for hearing something was knowing about it, it was after a bunch of 90's media that referenced and re-packaged old work. I grew up with access to a wide swath of animation history from Cartoon Network and Disney Channel, when they need to fill 24 hours a day before they really had any original programming. I would see ads for compilations of the hits of the 60's, 70's, and 80's. And even more specific ones for every possible audience, for the people who purely wanted moods or things like that. All previous time was happening at once on top of and inside of what was happening now.

But in the past, people really weren't in a position where they could passively absorb so much awareness of what was out there, and they genuinely needed someone to come in and save them, to tell them that everything they needed to know was wrong and here's the real shit. That's how such concrete identities were able to form and be caricatured on TV.

The reason that doesn't happen anymore is the same reason that I think a lot of people would take being called a simpleton and think "well that person has nothing to offer me, they can't connect to the narrative I've been building". And I don't mean to say that one of these is inherently better than the other, like there's all sorts of pitfalls with the reliance on recommendations from youtube and spotify. But I do think there's a fundamental clash between these different mindsets, like a student & teacher vs everyone is a peer sort of thing. Not sure if that can really be resolved too easily.

And this isn't really off topic either because this is pretty central to how I treat my chart. Like I would never want to tell anyone "here's the real shit" about this chart, no matter what they're listening to. I treat it like "here's all the cool people I met in Imaginationland, who did you meet, maybe we met some of the same ones and maybe we met some the other would find interesting". But I don't think I have the right music that has to be taught to people so that they know what's up.

I'm glad you liked the Jacques Lejeune, Fischman! That was the one I was alluding to earlier, it was done as a soundtrack for some sort of experimental dance telling the story of Snow White. I think the narrative and body movement part helps keep the music grounded and moving forward and that that's a big part of its success, but I'll get into that more later.

Skinny
birdman_handrub.gif

Tap wrote:

I grew up with access to a wide swath of animation history from Cartoon Network and Disney Channel, when they need to fill 24 hours a day before they really had any original programming. I would see ads for compilations of the hits of the 60's, 70's, and 80's. And even more specific ones for every possible audience, for the people who purely wanted moods or things like that. All previous time was happening at once on top of and inside of what was happening now.

I remember those sorts of adverts well, multi-CD boxsets that you could order over the phone for a one-time, cut-down price. I remember hearing clips of certain huge hits for the first time on those adverts, and believing those hits to be ubiquitous, songs that everybody everywhere would know, because as a child recognising that your own experiences are different to everyone else's is somewhat more difficult. (Mr. Mister's 'Broken Wings', in particular, springs to mind, because I've spoken to a number of people my age about those adverts and that song in the years since and yet apparently I'm the only person who remembers them.) And I guess the difference is that only people who were watching those channels at those times would have access to those memories. But today, most people I know have a Spotify account, or access to somebody else's, and Spotify have their carefully manicured era- or genre-specific playlists that people can choose to either engage with or ignore, as they see fit. Whereas, if I'm up late watching Are You Afraid of the Dark? or whatever and an advert comes on for an 8-disc Hits of the '80s collection and plays clips of Mr. Mister and Cyndi Lauper and Culture Club and John Cougar Mellencamp, I am less likely to actively avoid or choose to ignore that advert. If I changed the channel, I'd be explicitly opting out, whereas to play a Spotify playlist I have to explicitly opt in. But it's telling that marketing execs believed (and correctly too, I assume) that some people would feel they needed an 8-disc, one-artist one-song, collection of hits from a particular decade to give them access to the music they loved (or wanted to love), and how that still translates today into playlists with that same premise and basic intention that attract thousands of followers on Spotify.

So, you mentioned of that period, when those adverts would pop up on TV, that "all previous time was happening at once on top of and inside of what was happening now", based on the idea that we had access to old music and old television. But is that still the case? I mean, ostensibly nothing has changed. But, as a child, I was aware of and had seen children's films and television from the decades before I was born, as had all of my friends; I now work in a school, and children are almost to a person unaware of much of anything from before their time, at least in terms of cartoons and films. They may have seen The Lion King or Shrek (which makes me feel super old, to think of that film as being made before most of my students were born), but they are exceptions. In fact, much more than the kids of my generation (I'm 29), children these days seem to live in the now and the what's next, largely unaware of what came before. I find it exciting, asking the kids what music they're listening to and checking it out, but even direct antecedents of the artists they are listening to are nonentities to them. One student was listening to slowthai the other day, and I commented on how much he sounded like Dizzee Rascal, to a bewildered response. I don't think this is a bad thing, nor do I think it's necessarily a good thing. I just think you make a solid point, that growing up when we did meant that we were kind of forced to not only enjoy what was happening then, but be subjected to some of the stuff that had happened before, whereas access to everything is now so readily available that kids have no need to delve into a past that they can't relate to.

Anyway, I'm rambling, and I'm not even sure I've completely understood your point - just some observations.

Fischman wrote:

Skinny wrote:

Fischman wrote:

Skinny wrote:

Fisch man wrote:

Think you for perfectly understanding my intent in saying those things. Really, that was my whole point, that this is not my type of music, but I was able to appreciate it nonetheless.

To all the others who felt the need to get bent, realize that those things were tongue in cheek, not meant to be definitive statements of reality or absolutes in any way. That's why I asked you to read the whole thing before coming back with your very predictable responses. Hopefully you would recognize someone getting one of the best possible benefits from BEA, deliberately seeking things outside his comfort zone and, as a result, expanding his musical horizons. But no, true to form, you chose to misinterpret the intro in the worst possible light and cling to that throughout, thus allowing you to ignore the more relevant and important conclusion and cue up your snarky responses (which weren't nearly as clever as I suspect you think they are).

"I am cleverer than you all, stupid dumdums. You misinterpret everything I say because you are too simple to grasp my meaning. Despite the fact that my initial statements were offensively dismissive (which is my default setting, though I refuse to admit it), I will just say that they were oversimplifications and that you all fell into my trap, thus absolving myself of any responsibility whilst once again claiming superiority over you."

Anyway, lovely Syro write-up, Tap. I wasn't aware that the songs had been played back in ambient spaces and re-recorded, but it certainly explains the record's warmth. (I have the album on vinyl, somewhere, but clearly never paid enough attention to the sleeve, which is a lovely foldout number.) I haven't spun Syro in a while, though I listened to it a lot when it first came out, and I remember thinking of it as being prog-funk, almost; super dense, but also really accessible and squelchy, like Hancock's Headhunters filtered through DeepDream. I know that's an oversimplification of an album that goes in many directions, but it's my overriding memory. I probably only prefer SAWII and Surfing On Sine Waves from his catalogue, but the fact that all three are so very different is a testament to the man, whose career you summarised nicely.

And truer to form than any, you're ignorance and whatever else prompts you to be a jackass brings you in right on cue.

There was no "trap" here. The bulk of the post was dedicated to how I came to appreciate the album despite my biases going in. That's pretty explicit, not a trap and not designed to provoke a certain response. Context and conclusion were clear. But of course, your pathetic day isn't complete unless you can attack me for something so ya' gotta' manufacture some perceived slight to justify your rant. Gawd, man, get over yourself.

The reason you rub people up the wrong way - one of them, anyway - is that you are unwilling (or incapable) of presenting a negative opinion on something without belittling it and, by extension, those that enjoy it. You might be a lovely person in real life, but your internet discourse is dismissive to the point of (seemingly deliberate) provocation. You could have just said that you weren't particularly au fait with/fond of hip-hop or sampling, but you felt the need to wilfully insult those art forms - reducing rapping to talking, equating sampling with theft, and implying the use of electronic instruments is somehow worth less than that of "real" instruments, whatever that means - before becoming defensive when others became understandably provoked. You then claimed that said responses were "predictable", which means that they were clearly avoidable, and yet you chose not to avoid them. You want to provoke people, and then play the victim when people become provoked, all the while claiming to have been uniformly misinterpreted whilst implying that you are the smartest person in the room. It's an exhausting form of discourse.

Anyway, apologies to Tap for in any way derailing your thread. Again, top Syro writeup.

Well, I know typing on the internet doesn't communicate the sly twist in the corner of my mouth or the twinkle in my eye that makes people in person laugh at my jabs and spar back with equally good natured jabs. Okay. But even in the absence of those nonverbals, why assume the worst? People are far too quick to take offense. It's no wonder you falsely assume me of deliberately wanting to provoke people... you're very quick to jump to false conclusions in general (like labeling me a prog snob even though I love and praise a wide variety of music).

One need not extrapolate "by extension." If I say a piece of music is simple minded, that does not imply that "by extension" I'm saying anyone who listens to it is simple minded. I know some positively brilliant people who listen to simple music. I've never implied theres a correlation between complexity of music enjoyed and traits of the listener. I've had bosses, much smarter or more successful than me who listen to country!! (yeah, there I go again, but hopefully you get the point. I know awesome people who have no musical acumen whatsoever.

I could refer you to a thread I posted in on the Movies and TV board. Someone responded to my post starting with "Christ..." and went on to tirade against my selections. He went so far to say (directly even, not by implication or by extension) that anyone who had my preferences was "a simpleton." Now if I'm some sort or arrogant snob, wouldn't directly calling me a simpleton be the ultimate insult? And yet I didn't take it personally, get bent, or feel the need to retaliate against that poster. We're cool. I was enriched by his statements as they helped my gain an understanding of the topic I previously lacked.

"People are far too quick to take offense" is a really strange thing to say. Jokingly or otherwise, you lambaste popular forms of music for being somehow less complex than the music you enjoy (a subjective measure, in the sense that, to me, erecting a wall is a much more complex task than solving an algebraic equation, because I have no previous experience of the former, just as Neil Peart wouldn't be able to write and perform a double-time rap full of internal rhymes, and just as Jay-Z wouldn't be able to compose and perform a drum solo in 7/8 time), you pour scorn on suicide victims and those who identify with them, and you refer to the majority of people as "mindless" - and these are all things that you have provably, unequivocally done in the recent past on these forums - and then you blame others for being too easily offended, seemingly because they can't understand the nuances of what you are trying to say (I'm paraphrasing here, so please correct me if you feel that a misunderstanding of nuances is not what you meant).

The repeated references to complexity, along with the use of the term "mindless masses", are part of what leads me to find you extremely patronising. Whilst you may not believe that people who listen to "simple" music are simple-minded, the implication is still that they are incapable of or unwilling to enjoy the supposedly complex music that you like, leading to phrases such as "no musical acumen", which again suggests some level of objective judgement, implying once more that the music you listen to is inherently more worthy than other forms of music (in this case you mention country, albeit in jest, so we'll go with that). On top of this, you become highly defensive the minute anybody disagrees with you, either doubling down on your original point (as in the Kurt Cobain/"mindless masses" examples), accusing people of jumping to false conclusions, or claiming that people aren't smart enough to pick up on the nuances or intentions of your post (as in this thread), and then blaming everyone else for being too easily offended. It's an oddly insecure mentality.

As for your last paragraph, you are looking at things in binary, e.g. "being a snob = being offended by being called a 'simpleton', but I am not offended by being called a simpleton, ergo not a snob", but that isn't how things work. You were challenged by someone whose experiences and points of view you rightly recognised enriched you and your points of view, and therefore saw that person as a worthwhile conversationalist(/adversary). But you still think the majority of people, who are incapable of or unwilling to engage with the art that you like, are "mindless masses". You still think that many forms of popular music are "less complex" than the music you enjoy. You still use phrases like "musical acumen" (as opposed to something less patronising and objective, such as "musical experience", or "music preference"). And you still jump to blame everyone else for misunderstanding the intent of your posts, instead of looking first at yourself and questioning whether or not you made the intent evident enough to begin with. In fact, that arrogance is a recurring theme. You seemingly have an inherent "I'm right, you're wrong" mentality, which leads to pretty much all of the above, from the belief that the music you enjoy is more complex than other forms, to the blame you attach to others for failing to read your intentions, to the idea that people are simply too quick to take offense. They are symptoms of an arrogance which manifests itself - almost certainly unconsciously - in your patronising prose.

Look, feel free to ignore these criticisms and accuse me of "jumping to false conclusions" again. It's what I expect, at this point. I also understand the hypocrisy of me offering advice to anybody on conciliatory communication. But hopefully you take some of what I'm saying into account, because it may help us all to avoid future confrontations of this kind.
_________________
2021 in full effect. Come drop me some recs. Y'all know what I like.

Norman Bates

Gender: Male
Age: 51
Location: Paris, France

Fischman wrote:

1. I don't care for hip hop or any music overly reliant on a repetitive beat. I just will not get to the point where I can think of talking over artificial percussion as meaningful music.

Rock has repetitive beats, so has blues, and you have those in your BEA chart.

Fischman wrote:

2. [...] Write your own damn music.

But you have Led Zeppelin III on your BEA chart?

Fischman wrote:

3. I don't care for most electronic music. Play a real damn instrument!

Loads of electronic synths in your top 10.

I sincerely don't understand most of your strong standings, as they seem to go against your own tastes?

Norman Bates

Gender: Male
Age: 51
Location: Paris, France

Fischman wrote:

To all the others who felt the need to get bent, realize that those things were tongue in cheek,

Sorry, shd have read earlier. nvm me.

Fischman
RockMonster, JazzMeister, Bluesboy,ClassicalMaster

Gender: Male
Location: Land of Enchantment

Skinny wrote:

I remember those sorts of adverts well, multi-CD boxsets that you could order over the phone for a one-time, cut-down price. I remember hearing clips of certain huge hits for the first time on those adverts, and believing those hits to be ubiquitous, songs that everybody everywhere would know, because as a child recognising that your own experiences are different to everyone else's is somewhat more difficult. (Mr. Mister's 'Broken Wings', in particular, springs to mind, because I've spoken to a number of people my age about those adverts and that song in the years since and yet apparently I'm the only person who remembers them.) And I guess the difference is that only people who were watching those channels at those times would have access to those memories. But today, most people I know have a Spotify account, or access to somebody else's, and Spotify have their carefully manicured era- or genre-specific playlists that people can choose to either engage with or ignore, as they see fit. Whereas, if I'm up late watching Are You Afraid of the Dark? or whatever and an advert comes on for an 8-disc Hits of the '80s collection and plays clips of Mr. Mister and Cyndi Lauper and Culture Club and John Cougar Mellencamp, I am less likely to actively avoid or choose to ignore that advert. If I changed the channel, I'd be explicitly opting out, whereas to play a Spotify playlist I have to explicitly opt in. But it's telling that marketing execs believed (and correctly too, I assume) that some people would feel they needed an 8-disc, one-artist one-song, collection of hits from a particular decade to give them access to the music they loved (or wanted to love), and how that still translates today into playlists with that same premise and basic intention that attract thousands of followers on Spotify.

So, you mentioned of that period, when those adverts would pop up on TV, that "all previous time was happening at once on top of and inside of what was happening now", based on the idea that we had access to old music and old television. But is that still the case? I mean, ostensibly nothing has changed. But, as a child, I was aware of and had seen children's films and television from the decades before I was born, as had all of my friends; I now work in a school, and children are almost to a person unaware of much of anything from before their time, at least in terms of cartoons and films. They may have seen The Lion King or Shrek (which makes me feel super old, to think of that film as being made before most of my students were born), but they are exceptions. In fact, much more than the kids of my generation (I'm 29), children these days seem to live in the now and the what's next, largely unaware of what came before. I find it exciting, asking the kids what music they're listening to and checking it out, but even direct antecedents of the artists they are listening to are nonentities to them. One student was listening to slowthai the other day, and I commented on how much he sounded like Dizzee Rascal, to a bewildered response. I don't think this is a bad thing, nor do I think it's necessarily a good thing. I just think you make a solid point, that growing up when we did meant that we were kind of forced to not only enjoy what was happening then, but be subjected to some of the stuff that had happened before, whereas access to everything is now so readily available that kids have no need to delve into a past that they can't relate to.

Anyway, I'm rambling, and I'm not even sure I've completely understood your point - just some observations.

Fischman wrote:

Skinny wrote:

Fischman wrote:

Skinny wrote:

Fisch man wrote:

Think you for perfectly understanding my intent in saying those things. Really, that was my whole point, that this is not my type of music, but I was able to appreciate it nonetheless.

To all the others who felt the need to get bent, realize that those things were tongue in cheek, not meant to be definitive statements of reality or absolutes in any way. That's why I asked you to read the whole thing before coming back with your very predictable responses. Hopefully you would recognize someone getting one of the best possible benefits from BEA, deliberately seeking things outside his comfort zone and, as a result, expanding his musical horizons. But no, true to form, you chose to misinterpret the intro in the worst possible light and cling to that throughout, thus allowing you to ignore the more relevant and important conclusion and cue up your snarky responses (which weren't nearly as clever as I suspect you think they are).

"I am cleverer than you all, stupid dumdums. You misinterpret everything I say because you are too simple to grasp my meaning. Despite the fact that my initial statements were offensively dismissive (which is my default setting, though I refuse to admit it), I will just say that they were oversimplifications and that you all fell into my trap, thus absolving myself of any responsibility whilst once again claiming superiority over you."

Anyway, lovely Syro write-up, Tap. I wasn't aware that the songs had been played back in ambient spaces and re-recorded, but it certainly explains the record's warmth. (I have the album on vinyl, somewhere, but clearly never paid enough attention to the sleeve, which is a lovely foldout number.) I haven't spun Syro in a while, though I listened to it a lot when it first came out, and I remember thinking of it as being prog-funk, almost; super dense, but also really accessible and squelchy, like Hancock's Headhunters filtered through DeepDream. I know that's an oversimplification of an album that goes in many directions, but it's my overriding memory. I probably only prefer SAWII and Surfing On Sine Waves from his catalogue, but the fact that all three are so very different is a testament to the man, whose career you summarised nicely.

And truer to form than any, you're ignorance and whatever else prompts you to be a jackass brings you in right on cue.

There was no "trap" here. The bulk of the post was dedicated to how I came to appreciate the album despite my biases going in. That's pretty explicit, not a trap and not designed to provoke a certain response. Context and conclusion were clear. But of course, your pathetic day isn't complete unless you can attack me for something so ya' gotta' manufacture some perceived slight to justify your rant. Gawd, man, get over yourself.

The reason you rub people up the wrong way - one of them, anyway - is that you are unwilling (or incapable) of presenting a negative opinion on something without belittling it and, by extension, those that enjoy it. You might be a lovely person in real life, but your internet discourse is dismissive to the point of (seemingly deliberate) provocation. You could have just said that you weren't particularly au fait with/fond of hip-hop or sampling, but you felt the need to wilfully insult those art forms - reducing rapping to talking, equating sampling with theft, and implying the use of electronic instruments is somehow worth less than that of "real" instruments, whatever that means - before becoming defensive when others became understandably provoked. You then claimed that said responses were "predictable", which means that they were clearly avoidable, and yet you chose not to avoid them. You want to provoke people, and then play the victim when people become provoked, all the while claiming to have been uniformly misinterpreted whilst implying that you are the smartest person in the room. It's an exhausting form of discourse.

Anyway, apologies to Tap for in any way derailing your thread. Again, top Syro writeup.

Well, I know typing on the internet doesn't communicate the sly twist in the corner of my mouth or the twinkle in my eye that makes people in person laugh at my jabs and spar back with equally good natured jabs. Okay. But even in the absence of those nonverbals, why assume the worst? People are far too quick to take offense. It's no wonder you falsely assume me of deliberately wanting to provoke people... you're very quick to jump to false conclusions in general (like labeling me a prog snob even though I love and praise a wide variety of music).

One need not extrapolate "by extension." If I say a piece of music is simple minded, that does not imply that "by extension" I'm saying anyone who listens to it is simple minded. I know some positively brilliant people who listen to simple music. I've never implied theres a correlation between complexity of music enjoyed and traits of the listener. I've had bosses, much smarter or more successful than me who listen to country!! (yeah, there I go again, but hopefully you get the point. I know awesome people who have no musical acumen whatsoever.

I could refer you to a thread I posted in on the Movies and TV board. Someone responded to my post starting with "Christ..." and went on to tirade against my selections. He went so far to say (directly even, not by implication or by extension) that anyone who had my preferences was "a simpleton." Now if I'm some sort or arrogant snob, wouldn't directly calling me a simpleton be the ultimate insult? And yet I didn't take it personally, get bent, or feel the need to retaliate against that poster. We're cool. I was enriched by his statements as they helped my gain an understanding of the topic I previously lacked.

"People are far too quick to take offense" is a really strange thing to say. Jokingly or otherwise, you lambaste popular forms of music for being somehow less complex than the music you enjoy (a subjective measure, in the sense that, to me, erecting a wall is a much more complex task than solving an algebraic equation, because I have no previous experience of the former, just as Neil Peart wouldn't be able to write and perform a double-time rap full of internal rhymes, and just as Jay-Z wouldn't be able to compose and perform a drum solo in 7/8 time), you pour scorn on suicide victims and those who identify with them, and you refer to the majority of people as "mindless" - and these are all things that you have provably, unequivocally done in the recent past on these forums - and then you blame others for being too easily offended, seemingly because they can't understand the nuances of what you are trying to say (I'm paraphrasing here, so please correct me if you feel that a misunderstanding of nuances is not what you meant).

The repeated references to complexity, along with the use of the term "mindless masses", are part of what leads me to find you extremely patronising. Whilst you may not believe that people who listen to "simple" music are simple-minded, the implication is still that they are incapable of or unwilling to enjoy the supposedly complex music that you like, leading to phrases such as "no musical acumen", which again suggests some level of objective judgement, implying once more that the music you listen to is inherently more worthy than other forms of music (in this case you mention country, albeit in jest, so we'll go with that). On top of this, you become highly defensive the minute anybody disagrees with you, either doubling down on your original point (as in the Kurt Cobain/"mindless masses" examples), accusing people of jumping to false conclusions, or claiming that people aren't smart enough to pick up on the nuances or intentions of your post (as in this thread), and then blaming everyone else for being too easily offended. It's an oddly insecure mentality.

As for your last paragraph, you are looking at things in binary, e.g. "being a snob = being offended by being called a 'simpleton', but I am not offended by being called a simpleton, ergo not a snob", but that isn't how things work. You were challenged by someone whose experiences and points of view you rightly recognised enriched you and your points of view, and therefore saw that person as a worthwhile conversationalist(/adversary). But you still think the majority of people, who are incapable of or unwilling to engage with the art that you like, are "mindless masses". You still think that many forms of popular music are "less complex" than the music you enjoy. You still use phrases like "musical acumen" (as opposed to something less patronising and objective, such as "musical experience", or "music preference"). And you still jump to blame everyone else for misunderstanding the intent of your posts, instead of looking first at yourself and questioning whether or not you made the intent evident enough to begin with. In fact, that arrogance is a recurring theme. You seemingly have an inherent "I'm right, you're wrong" mentality, which leads to pretty much all of the above, from the belief that the music you enjoy is more complex than other forms, to the blame you attach to others for failing to read your intentions, to the idea that people are simply too quick to take offense. They are symptoms of an arrogance which manifests itself - almost certainly unconsciously - in your patronising prose.

Look, feel free to ignore these criticisms and accuse me of "jumping to false conclusions" again. It's what I expect, at this point. I also understand the hypocrisy of me offering advice to anybody on conciliatory communication. But hopefully you take some of what I'm saying into account, because it may help us all to avoid future confrontations of this kind.

I guess I could preface everything I say with IMO, but that really shouldn't be necessary as this whole web sit is about the sharing of opinions. One of your men false assumptions was that I present my opinions as fact. I have been rather explicit whin I go into fact mode.

With further apology to Tap, I will make one final appeal to rational thought on your part. Yes, I began the post on this thread with negative statements about electronic music and hip hop and sampling....but then I IMMEDIATELY went on to say how I appreciated an album which was an amalgamation of all three of those things. And recall, I said "I dont like" not "it inherently sucks."

So here's the real crux... if I really an some sort of self superior jackass, why would the obvious bottom line and central thesis of my post be about me liking music I had just declared inferior? It makes no sense. C'mon, man. This isn't rocket science. You dont have to be a PhD philosopher to understand basic logic. Read the whole post rather than jumping to a conclusion based on the first three lines (just as if your going to use a list do draw s conclusion, you should read more than the firs two entries on a hundred item list, eh?)

Tap fully und et ratios my meaning and intent. And it was his list. It was his favorite I was supposedly criticizing. If anybody here has cause for a negative reaction, it was him. Yet her took it as intended. Why must you be so fragile?