When people you love have bad taste in music

A repository for everything else. Introductions, off-topic threads, testing and so on. When in doubt, post it here.

Moderators: Moderators Emeritus, Moderators

User avatar
BladeRunner
Posts: 624
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 2:24 pm
Location: Los Santos
Contact:

Postby BladeRunner » Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 pm

that is awesome, that makes you awesome.

Leroy
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 4:18 pm
Location: Loverstown, Washington
Contact:

Postby Leroy » Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:37 pm

Betty Felon wrote:So you guys would break up a romantic relationship that is otherwise great because you can't share music?


you can do as millions of others and just have a little musical sugar on the side. is it bad to cheat when lust is not involved? it is not mine to judge. i just know that the last relationship i was in my girlfriend was lightly musically constipated so i got a little sugar on the side and went to shows with "friends" and talked music with "just some kids i know" etc.

whats wrong with a little sugar on the side when the loved one can't provide?

User avatar
Liesbeth
Posts: 3259
Joined: Sat May 03, 2003 4:27 am
Current Heading: West
Location: megaland
Contact:

Postby Liesbeth » Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:03 am

Ah, how to explain the Madonna factor. In fact, the best explanation would be that it could just as easily be named the <insert name of famous artist with big show>-factor. Because what I'm talking about is people for whom it really doesn't matter much what name is there, they are looking for an evening out and the music is just part of the show, often even of minor importance than the show. It's the same with festivals, some people I know will go to festivals not because they really want to see any of the bands, but because of the atmosphere.

Which is fine, if that's what makes them happy. Really, conical breasts and whatnot, I do not care. But, if they'd be applying that approach to the music I deeply care for, it would clash so bad. So I avoid that by not trying to persuade them to my side, and seeking mutual interest in other fields.

User avatar
LoveSickJerk
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 2:02 pm
Current Heading: Ascending
Location: Buffalo, NY et al.
Contact:

Postby LoveSickJerk » Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:37 am

Betty Felon wrote:
Karousme wrote:Of course music is the most important aspect, because if you were deaf, you wouldn't even hear it, and then a Madonna video would just be a lady on TV with conical breasts.


Oh, I wasn't going there. I was assuming the music is solid in both circumstances, one with bells and whistles, the other without. Or better yet, the same musicians with and without the added showmanship.

Madonna with normal breasts, so to speak (and yes, I think Madonna is good....cheesy maybe, but I like cheese.)

Perhaps the Postal Service is better when it's in movie than not?


I don't really think we should be looking at this in terms of "better" or "worse". I think what we're looking at is "easier" rather than "better". Seeing is easier than listening. Culturally (speaking from a USA perspective) we've been programmed to find entertainment visually rather than using all of our senses in concert to understand our world and our art we create in it. The experience is easier to appreciate if you can visually link a sound, or a taste or a smell to something else. The Ramones are a perfect example with their uniform of leather jackets and ripped jeans, selling an image with the sound (it was good, and the image was good). That does not make them Better, just more accessible.
The Postal Service or even The Shins aren't better because of uses in film, they're simply easier to get into because you want Natalie Portman telling you to listen to this song, or you want to be her telling some cute guy to listen to it. The visual experience of that song supersedes any quality behind it, as well as diminishing any work to understand (read:listen to) it.

Otherwise, I agree with Karosume. Maybe I should have just said that instead of writing a book...
Last edited by LoveSickJerk on Wed Mar 30, 2005 7:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Betty Felon
Posts: 1779
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 4:15 pm
Location: miserable degrees fahrenheit
Contact:

Postby Betty Felon » Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:59 am

Liesbeth wrote:
Which is fine, if that's what makes them happy. Really, conical breasts and whatnot, I do not care. But, if they'd be applying that approach to the music I deeply care for, it would clash so bad. So I avoid that by not trying to persuade them to my side, and seeking mutual interest in other fields.


This attitude sounds so healthy and reasonable. And when forced to admit it, I do have several very good friends that just want to dance, and have no interest in going into a smokey dive bar to see some unwashed traveling crooner with boring breasts (even if he/she happens to be a genius.)

There's a wall there though, with friends like that. They miss out on a lot of your life when a lot of your life is spent going to shows they've never heard of. They are absent from a good deal of events and stories, etc. You can't have conversations about the interesting new sounds you've heard when their pallete is so limited.

As for sugar on the side, I've tried this route. Dating one guy and enjoying the kickass record player/collection/orginal Zelda of another. I was never too happy with that arrangment. I usually wished I could smush the two together into one whole complete boy.

User avatar
aj
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 10:45 pm
Location: getting closer
Contact:

Postby aj » Wed Mar 30, 2005 8:21 am

hmm... I agree with lovesick. some people need to watch the movie instead of reading the book. it's easier. they can't connect to the music alone, but when someone shows them how to connect to the music, bingo. so perhaps you should perform some interpretive dance to the music you want others to enjoy. physically show your emotional connection. problem solved.

if the sex is good keep the relationship. jk. kind of. of course, this does not apply to family. for the most part.

there are happy mediums that are not watered down. it's hard to do and can be quite limiting, but isn't that what relationships are about? limiting your options? ok. I'm kind of kidding on that one too.

wanting to like it is good enough. it shows you care enough to try it out. that's something. but I hate it when someone pretends to be into something to please. of course, there is the whole growing accustomed to it thing, but I don't know... that leaves an icky taste in my mouth.

as for people who only have exes stuff-- that's a vicious hideous cycle. unfortunately this is reminding me of julia roberts and how she likes her eggs. you gotta know who you are or there's no point. who wants to date themselves anyway? I mean, I'm great and everything, but I'd rather date someone that isn't like me. that way I can mold them into something more like myself later, to keep interested. if one starts with a finished product, boredom comes abruptly.

User avatar
Karousme
Posts: 530
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 12:20 am
Location: Your Smelly Face
Contact:

Postby Karousme » Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:47 am

LoveSickJerk wrote:I don't really think we should be looking at this in terms of "better" or "worse". I think what we're looking at is "easier" rather than "better". Seeing is easier than listening.


I think we're on to some sort of hierarchy here...
Television/Film
Live Music
Recorded Music
Reading

Maybe it's this way because you use more senses when you watch TV as opposed to reading a book. Nobody reads anymore. And if they do, it's probably a magazine or Da Vinci Code. Internet should probably be in there too. Most likely at the top.

I agree with the statement that people need to be told what to listen to. I remember in college, whenever a band came to campus, they had to get qualified in some sort of way. "We once opened for Dave Matthews!" or "Featuring former members of Soul Asylum!" and then everyone would show up. If a qualitative statement was missing from their poster, nobody came.
Last edited by Karousme on Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Betty Felon
Posts: 1779
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 4:15 pm
Location: miserable degrees fahrenheit
Contact:

Postby Betty Felon » Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:22 am

aj wrote:hmm... I agree with lovesick. some people need to watch the movie instead of reading the book. it's easier. they can't connect to the music alone, but when someone shows them how to connect to the music, bingo. so perhaps you should perform some interpretive dance to the music you want others to enjoy. physically show your emotional connection. problem solved.

if the sex is good keep the relationship. jk. kind of. of course, this does not apply to family. for the most part.

there are happy mediums that are not watered down. it's hard to do and can be quite limiting, but isn't that what relationships are about? limiting your options? ok. I'm kind of kidding on that one too.

wanting to like it is good enough. it shows you care enough to try it out. that's something. but I hate it when someone pretends to be into something to please. of course, there is the whole growing accustomed to it thing, but I don't know... that leaves an icky taste in my mouth.

as for people who only have exes stuff-- that's a vicious hideous cycle. unfortunately this is reminding me of julia roberts and how she likes her eggs. you gotta know who you are or there's no point. who wants to date themselves anyway? I mean, I'm great and everything, but I'd rather date someone that isn't like me. that way I can mold them into something more like myself later, to keep interested. if one starts with a finished product, boredom comes abruptly.


laughing out loud. at work. to each paragraph of this.

User avatar
LoveSickJerk
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 2:02 pm
Current Heading: Ascending
Location: Buffalo, NY et al.
Contact:

Postby LoveSickJerk » Thu Mar 31, 2005 6:31 am

Karousme wrote:I think we're on to some sort of hierarchy here...
Television/Film
Live Music
Recorded Music
Reading


I think everything you mentioned has its amazing ability to stimulate our senses (seperately or combined), and can have its artists and entertainers in each catergory. Films are different than movies, for example; they're a specific form of entertainment and engagement that is supposed to evoke a reality-esque experience through the illusion of movement. They're made for they eyes. Music is made for the ears, and when combined, the lines get a little blurry.
I wasn't trying to suggest a heirarchy in media, I was trying to suggest the associative responses brought on by visual images coupled with sound, and the prdominance of those images over the quality of music. Each one of those differnent medias (and I would suggest Television and Film be seperated), have thier artists and thier entertainers, and for different reasons.
The predominance of TV and Movies (not Films, mind you) only furthers the idea that Reading and listening to music simply as the activity (goddamn you multi-tasking!!!) are simply harder, or less desireable to our culture than the ease of the visually stimulated. Don't think of it as a pyramid, think of it as corners in a room, the darkest ones are filled by books unread and dusty unheard records.

stephanie
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:53 am

if we live to see the other side of this

Postby stephanie » Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:06 am

This wouldn't be such a problem if all the boys who listened to the same music as me weren't egomaniacal, heartless bastards.

Still, I shudder to think that anyone I know would so much as touch (let alone romance) someone who liked Dave Matthews Band with a stick, unless said stick was sharp, pointy and full of spite.

It's all about compromise. And if music is that important to you, you really can't justify buckling under "just this once" because the girl you think is so cute insists John Darnielle's voice is worse than nails down a chalkboard. Otherwise, you've obviously made the choice to value an interpersonal relationship over yr records (NOTE: your records will never leave you). Keep in mind, though -- when you're gettin' down with the SO and he/she puts on Jack Johnson, you won't be able to run crying to the friends who'd all looked on in horror as you led someone wearing a Creed t-shirt into the sold-out Bloc Party show.
Also, people who don't like indie rock are stupid.

The end.

mildlyrestarted
Posts: 469
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 3:26 pm
Location: 98115
Contact:

Postby mildlyrestarted » Sat Apr 02, 2005 11:51 am

hahaha. i just remembered that time when we were living together, and i brought this boy home after we went to a nude figure drawing class as a date. i introduced him to you and you guys started to talk about music, when he let it slide that he maybe kind of thought creed was a talented band. you told him to get the hell out of your room, and i'm pretty sure he shortly thereafter left the apartment, never to be seen again.. except for a few random phone calls i ignored. hahaha. you're the best friend ever.


oh yeah, this is a public forum. as you were.

User avatar
chelsea
Posts: 726
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Queen Anne Hill
Contact:

Re: if we live to see the other side of this

Postby chelsea » Sat Apr 02, 2005 3:24 pm

stephanie wrote:
Still, I shudder to think that anyone I know would so much as touch (let alone romance) someone who liked Dave Matthews Band with a stick, unless said stick was sharp, pointy and full of spite.

Also, people who don't like indie rock are stupid.


AMEN. to all of that.

User avatar
LoveSickJerk
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 2:02 pm
Current Heading: Ascending
Location: Buffalo, NY et al.
Contact:

Re: if we live to see the other side of this

Postby LoveSickJerk » Sun Apr 03, 2005 8:43 am

chelsea wrote:
stephanie wrote:
Still, I shudder to think that anyone I know would so much as touch (let alone romance) someone who liked Dave Matthews Band with a stick, unless said stick was sharp, pointy and full of spite.

Also, people who don't like indie rock are stupid.


AMEN. to all of that.


Wow. I'm completely screwed. Because I own the first 3 DMB cds.

User avatar
sour29
Posts: 2057
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 7:53 am
Current Heading: Ascending
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Postby sour29 » Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:49 am

That is one of the funniest sites I've ever been to. I went there several months ago and enjoyed it thoroughly. Thanks for reminding me, and enabling me to love it all over again.

User avatar
Dan
Mod Emeritus
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 10:04 pm
Location: Jamaica Plain, MA
Contact:

Re: if we live to see the other side of this

Postby Dan » Mon Apr 04, 2005 1:33 am

stephanie wrote:Keep in mind, though -- when you're gettin' down with the SO and he/she puts on Jack Johnson, you won't be able to run crying to the friends who'd all looked on in horror as you led someone wearing a Creed t-shirt into the sold-out Bloc Party show.


*looks around, whistles innocently*

Although I must say that person in question very much tolerated and apparently enjoyed the Hold Steady. So.

User avatar
heathalouise
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 10:11 am
Location: philadelphia

Re: if we live to see the other side of this

Postby heathalouise » Mon Apr 04, 2005 6:49 am

Dan wrote:Although I must say that person in question very much tolerated and apparently enjoyed the Hold Steady. So.


Who doesn't tolerate and enjoy the Hold Steady? (Actually, "tolerate" is way too lukewarm a word. Worship and revere is much more appropriate.)

What if your SO doesn't have "bad" taste in music, just "incompatible" on some levels? My fiance and I have a deal -- he can't play the Minutemen or his hardcore records when I'm in the house, and I can't play most late '80s-early '90s Boston alt-pop (Blake Babies, Lemonheads, etc., although I hardly ever listen to that anymore) when he's home.

I find this works out well, and occasionally, we turn each other on to music we would have never sought out on our own. Without him, I would have never given the Misfits a fair shake, and without me, he would have never amassed a knowledge of Half-A-Cow bands (Smudge, Godstar, Sneeze, etc.) or solo Morrissey.

Then again, every time I hear someone say, "I don't really listen to music," I tend to look at them as if they just said, "I don't really breathe all that much..."

User avatar
chelsea
Posts: 726
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 8:53 pm
Location: Queen Anne Hill
Contact:

Re: if we live to see the other side of this

Postby chelsea » Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:37 am

heathalouise wrote:Then again, every time I hear someone say, "I don't really listen to music," I tend to look at them as if they just said, "I don't really breathe all that much..."


yeah, kinda the same as "i like all kinds of music" meaning "i like no kinds of music."


Return to “Cattywampus”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests