Musicians I’m Supposed To Like But Don’t
As I was scrolling through my iPod the other day I realized I’ve got a lot of music that I have for the sole reason that I’m “supposed” to have it, not because I like it. Sure I’ve listened to it all, but it’s always been out of obligation, I’m never in the mood for it. I should probably feel ashamed but I don’t. So here’s the list:
Al Green
Peter Gabriel
Eric Clapton
Elvis Costello
Metallica
R.E.M.
The Cure
The Strokes
The Velvet Underground
Who are yours?
Posted on February 12, 2006, in Music. Bookmark the permalink. 66 Comments.
Steve Evans
RJH
Scott B.
John C.
Susan M
Aaron Brown
ninemoons
John Harrison
kulturblogadmin
Kyle M
Brad
KulturBlogGuest
MCQ
Wm
Rebecca
Ivan
Geoff J
btdgreg
Clark Goble
Aaron R.
Tim J
Ben
Marcus
Brad Williams
gibsonbn
Not listen to Al Green? Are you insane?
I’ll have to think about this a bit. I tend to not give up on bands. My taste has changed and expanded so much in the last five years, I know eventually I’ll probably find something to appreciate in bands I’m not into right now.
Dude, not even “Enter Sandman”??
Okay, my brain is melting. Somebody made a list that equates Peter Gabriel and the Cure with the Velvet Underground.
Excuse me while I go dump some honey barbecue sauce on our Niman Ranch steaks…
I don’t intentionally hang on to stuff I don’t like. The short list of stuff I’m supposed to like, but don’t:
The Beatles (heavy on charisma, heavier on annoying schlock–like showtunes, even though you know it’s bad, you still want to dance along.)
Led Zeppelin (I dislike this in so many ways– goes for most “classic rock”)
Most of David Bowie (could almost let him pass if it wasn’t for labyrinth)
Bob Dylan, as a performer (with few exceptions, such as “Hurricane,” most everyone sings his stuff better than he does)
Coltrane, Davis (I think I’m coming around on this, though. be bop is just too busy for most moods.)
Pearl Jam (do I really need to comment?)
R.E.M.
The Cure
The Who (don’t flog me!- I’ve even seen them live, just never been able to get into it, and now it’s all just CSI songs)
Sting (with very few exceptions-sorry!)
U2- (I know this is a death penalty offense on KB, but their sanctimonious self-righteous attitudes just turn me off, and have for years…)
Tracy, you’re entitled to your opinion about U2, no matter how stupid it is.
Morrissey
The Smiths (with the exception of a small handful of songs)
U2, post 1992
Led Zeppelin
Pearl Jam (and any other earnest-voiced 90s grunge band you can think of)
Dave Matthews
Loretta Lynn (no, not even with Jack White)
and I’ll throw in…
new-country chick music, e.g. Shania Twain (in my social group, it’s really shocking to dislike Shania, but every time I’m in a carful of women and someone turns it on I want to scream and jump out the window)
This post should be subtitled, “Your Favorite Band Sucks!”
Okay, Enter Sandman isn’t bad. But I can’t think of a single other one of their songs I enjoy.
RT, I didn’t equate Peter Gabriel with The Cure and The Velveeta Underground, I just know that I’m supposed to like all of them and don’t like any.
But when I read other people putting Led Zeppelin on their lists I wonder what’s wrong with their heads! I mean, have you really listened to them????
Rusty, I’ve been subjected to Led Zeppelin many times, in many different circumstances, and no, I just don’t like them. Testosterone-overdosed vocals, overwrought classic guitar rifs, fake blues, combined with pretentious teenage geekdom fantasy just doesn’t do much for me. Sorry.
(Fortunately, we seem to have overcome the dark days of the Thunderdome.)
Shouldn’t be too shocking to realize that some people think your favorite band sucks. I personally love early R.E.M., Elvis Costello and The Velvet Underground, but I’m not going to bomb any embassies if anyone else disagrees.
When people say they don’t like a band, I always feel like they just haven’t listened to them properly. Or enough. Or listened to the right material.
Take the Who and Tracy. How much of the Who’s catalogue have you really heard? Is it just the arena-rock, later stuff? (Like the CSI songs?) Cuz they started out as mods, and their early stuff is really fun.
I have a friend I sent a bunch of Husker Du to, and he said he didn’t like it. I asked what he’d listened to, and he named one of their later albums. I told him to try an earlier one, and bingo.
The first question is this: what music am I supposed to like? Am I suppsed to like music if it’s popular? Am I supposed to like Aerosmith? Coldplay? I don’t think so.
I think I’m supposed to like music that is widely acclaimed. But what constitutes “widely acclaimed” (I don’t think Grammy wins count)? Is Pearl Jam widely acclaimed? I don’t think so. Not anymore. So I don’t think I’m supposed to like them (although I do). Others that have been mentioned that I don’t think I’m necessarily supposed to like: Peter Gabriel, Metallica, The Strokes (not anymore), post-1992 U2, Dave Mathews.
I’m pretty sure I’m supposed to like Springsteen (aren’t I?) and I don’t. I find his music about as intriguing as Bon Jovi’s. I don’t like the Rolling Stones. I don’t like Kanye West (or any hip-hop/rap). I don’t like any funk (James Brown, Sly and the Family Stone, etc.).
I will not sit idly by while people blaspheme against The Who and Led Zeppelin! The rest of the world disagrees with you, boys. Some day you shall see the error of your ways. I only pray it doesn’t happen too late.
I agree with Susan: I gotta believe that people who don’t like some of these bands just haven’t really tried yet, or at least don’t know enough about music to enjoy them. For example, people who don’t like hip-hop or rap usually are missing the cultural linkage to that music. As a black man that music is much more near and dear to me.
I’ve never cared for Velvet Underground. Lou Reed made better work as a solo artist.
I acknowledge the power of a lot of the rock which Led Zeppelin produced, but it’s just not my thing. Ditto the Who, ditto Metallica, ditto every rock and roll band who ever got seduced into thinking they always had to put together A Big Loud Show rather than actually produce songs that were listenable. Yes, this means the Rolling Stones after Some Girls or Tattoo You, though I admit that they’ve continued to come up with the occasional good hook. This is also part of the reason why Eric Clapton is a god: because he had the good fortune of seeing every supergroup he was ever part of (Cream, Derek and the Dominoes, etc.) self-destruct before they could turn into self-parodies.
People tell me that U2 has recovered from their pretentious turn with Zooropa, and is making good music again, but I remain unconvinced. Bono is going good and important Christian work in this world, but that doesn’t justify his continuing to where those damn idiot sunglasses everywhere.
Elvis Costello and Peter Garbiel always were acquired tastes; they had the misfortune of having a couple of monster (or at least cult) hits, and garnering far more mass attention than their quirky talents really can satisfy. Not liking them shouldn’t be source of embarrassment, any more than not liking Robyn Hitchcock should be. (Actually, if you think about it, Bruce Springsteen belongs in this group too.)
I stopped listening to R.E.M. around Automatic for the People, because I realized soon thereafter that they actually already recorded every song they were ever going to be able to come up with, and were now left with just essentially covering themselves. (Which, again, is admittedly what the Rolling Stones started doing after about 10-12 years, but at least they did so earnestly, without any soul-killing irony.)
I don’t think I’ve ever heard a single song by the Strokes. I don’t even know who they are. Should I?
Russell, you should give the Strokes a shot. They’ve got a good sound that doesn’t go stale immediately (*cough*Franz Ferdinand*cough*)
p.s. Russell, it sounds like you gave up on music 15 years ago. Time to emerge from your bomb shelter, man.
I don’t think not liking someone means that you haven’t really listened to them. Or enough. Or well. Or are stupid when it comes to music. It could just be that you don’t like them. Or a lot of people are mislead!
Music has to mean something to you for you to like it. There’s a difference between appreciating someone for their music (Bowie, Al Green, etc) and really liking them personally. And then there are just those that you can’t stand. I certainly understand the meaning of this post – I’ve had this conversation with people many times. I don’t like A LOT of what I “should” like. The Beatles (ewww). Most classic rock (fill in the blank). Van Morrison (sorry, Susan. I really tried with the stuff you sent me!).
Gabby, wrong, wrong, WRONG! If you don’t like the music that I like then you are either stupid or deaf. Those are the only possibilities.
ESPECIALLY when it comes to Van Morrison!!!! Oh, Gabby. I pray that your soul will find a home someday.
I kind of thought that The Stroke’s sound got stale halfway through their first album. I liked it, but it bored me (if that makes sense).
I can’t fathom thinking that Lou Reed’s solo stuff is better than the Velvet Underground. Other than “Walk on the Wild Side” and “Satelite of Love,” I’ve come to the conclusioin, after years of trying to like solo Lou Reed, that he’s just not that great.
Susan M: “When people say they don’t like a band, I always feel like they just haven’t listened to them properly. Or enough. Or listened to the right material.”
SuperG: “I gotta believe that people who don’t like some of these bands just haven’t really tried yet, or at least don’t know enough about music to enjoy them. For example, people who don’t like hip-hop or rap usually are missing the cultural linkage to that music.”
When people say they hate music that I love or love music that I hate, I just figure they have different taste. How much I like music depends on how much pleasure it brings me to listen to it. I don’t consider any music or any artists good or bad. When I say I love Radiohead and I don’t like Kanye West I’m not saying that Thom York is more talented or more genius or more anything than Kanye West. I’m saying that I enjoy listening to Thom York’s music and I don’t enjoy listening to Kanye West’s.
I’m sure there is some objective measure by which the relative genius or talent of, say, Kanye West, Thom York, and Wolfgang Mozart, can be judged. But I don’t care how talented or genius an artist is or how objectively “good” any music is. All that matters is how much I like it. Sometimes I can identify the elements of music that makes it aesthetically pleasing or unpleasing to me, and sometimes I can articulate in a reasonable way why I like certain music, but not always. And I’m sure there are some subconscius social or cultural associations that my brain makes with the music that I hear that influences how much pleasure it brings me. But I try to take music as it comes and judge it independent of anything extraneous to the noise that is entering my ears.
For the most part, at least on a conscious level, the cultural aspects of music are irrelevant to me. I don’t know what the hell Radiohead’s music means. But I love the noise. I find it beautiful. There is music that I should identify with in a cultural sense that I don’t like at all. Springsteen supposedly sings about things that poor working white people care about. But his music bores me silly. The fact that rap means something to some people has no bearing on how much I enjoy listening to it. It does make me less likely to dismiss all rap as irredeemable crap, though.
Have your tastes not changed over time, though, Tom? Mine sure have. I’ve learned to appreciate all kinds of music I never did before. Which is why I rarely dismiss any band. I know eventually I might be at a place where I will find their music enjoyable.
Tom: there’s a point at which music hits a level of genius (nay, SUPER genius) that regardless of genre it needs to be appreciated and respected. When people say that they don’t like Miles Davis or Thom Yorke, it hurts because it says to me that they are putting their immediate, gut reaction ahead of a deeper form of appreciation.
Now, some may say that when it comes to the arts, immediate gut reaction is what matters. That’s a valid argument to make IF, only ONLY IF, you also have the capacity to appreciate intellectually and artistically pieces of art that you don’t particularly enjoy.
Music is like painting, dance or any other art form: it’s fine if you don’t like Picasso, Jackson Pollock or Joan Miro. But you sure as hell better understand them and understand their genius, or else you just don’t understand art, period.
screw enter sandman, metallica hasn’t put out anything really good since “…and justice for all!”
Certainly, Susan, my tastes have changed. I think they’ve probably broadened in some ways. But they’ve also refined and I’ve become more discriminating. So while I have come to really like some music that in the past I might’ve dismissed as too conventional, I’ve lost a taste for some music that I used to like.
I, too, hesitate to dismiss any music. Springsteen may one day appeal to me. That’s why I don’t usually make absolute quality judgments like “Springsteen sucks” or “Springsteen has no talent.” I make subjective statements of opinion like, “Springsteen’s music bores me,” or, “I don’t like rap.” I realize that my tastes may one day broaden to include Springsteen and rap.
But at the same time, I understand that there are some very discriminating, very smart, very open-minded people who will never find Radiohead’s music enjoyable, no matter how they’re exposed to the music. There’s no reason to say that their taste will broaden to include the music that I like. It’s just as likely that their taste will refine and narrow to exclude the music that I like.
re: “I liked it, but it bored me.”
There’s a lot of music I feel this way about. For instance, I like the Strokes, but I like listening to the songs better as part of a mix than listening to a whole album clear through. Ditto with much rap and funk — I like it, but I love variety. My attention span is pretty limited. If I had to listen to someone’s entire collection of (almost) any one band on a five hour car trip, I’d be homicidal by the end.
SuperG (#22),
Yes, one can develop appreciation and respect for an artist without finding their work aesthetically pleasing. But this requires knowledge and understanding of the objective qualities of the art, which many of us (myself included) don’t have. That touches on what I was saying about there being some objective measure of the genius of Mozart vs. York vs. West. I don’t understand music enough to judge who is objectively better. I have even fewer tools to objectively judge visual artistry. I know what’s aesthetically pleasing to me, but I couldn’t tell you why/if Picasso is a good artist.
Tom, none of us here are serious art appreciators. Even I, SUPERGENIUS, am a hack at best. But it doesn’t take much to make art and music much more appreciable. A little understanding of art history or music history is easily acquired. It doesn’t take an MFA to know about shading and perspective. Similarly you don’t have to be a classical pianist to see the technical mastery of someone like Art Tatum, but it helps to know just how hard some of his work is.
Take Van Morrison as an example: a little understanding of Irish folksong tradition or the story of delta blues is easy to get, but it opens up entire new worlds. Van is a master of letting you know exactly where he’s coming from and where he wants to take you. From “Cleaning Windows”:
I heard Leadbelly and Blind Lemon
On the street where I was born
Sonny Terry, Brownie McGhee,
Muddy Waters singin’ “I’m A Rolling Stone”
Those words were meaningless to me when I first heard the song, even though I liked the tune. But a little reading and a little listening, and now I see a whole world that Van is expressing.
Just saying that if people care at all about music and art, an hour or two would open up entire new perspectives for them.
SuperG RE: #18 -
I should clarify. Van Morrison is in the category of an artist I can appreciate, not one I just out & out dislike. I completely agree with the music is art statement (which I tried to articulate in #17). Therefore, I can appreciate Van Morrison as an artist and as someone people like. It just didn’t do anything for me personally. I’m thinking my soul can rest easy on that!
There are very few that I out & out dislike and state my dislike for regularly (like the Beatles). Most end up in the appreciate, but not for me category.
I’m very skeptical about music being judged better or worse by reference to some “objective” criteria. It seems to me that appreciation of music happens entirely in the subjective.
But then, I know almost no music theory and have very little knowledge of aesthetics. So there you go.
Oh! I can understand your passion for Van Morrison, though. I feel the same way about Neil Finn & Paul Weller and think the world would be a better place if only people would see the brilliance of those men. I have to remind myself that not everyone agrees, no matter how much I think I’m right. But I digress…
Greg, it doesn’t take music theory: I know none. I just know very little music history, and i know very little about technical difficulty.
Maybe someone should do a post on under-appreciated artists. I saw Bob Mould this weekend. At one point I was overwhelmed, thinking of all the amazing songs this one man had written, and how so many people don’t recognize the contribution he’s made to music.
Indeed. Bob Mould’s amazing. I wonder what qualifies as “underappreciated,” though. No hit songs? No popular recognition? No chance of ever being inducted into the rock music hall of fame? Mould’s definitely recognized by the critics and the rock music elitests.
Is he? I guess just the fact that his music never was popular. It was painful for me when “alternative” became popular. And Husker Du never got any recongition. They paved the way for a lot of the bands that were popular in the 90′s.
I will agree with this statement whole-heartedly in regards to fine arts- with one caveat: Art does often create a visceral rection, and that is often where your opinion is formed and you file it away in the “like” or “dislike” pile. And that is totally ok.
If you want to appreciate music or any art more, yeah, you need to learn more about it, then it becomes less of a visceral reaction and moves more into intellectual appreaciation. Thus, I can appreciate the musical contrubutions (and even genius) of bands like U2, The Who, and various others, while it does not change my gut reaction one iota.
I totally DIG Jackson Pollock. I finally GOT it when I moved away from my physical reaction into comprehension. Then the most lovely thing happened- my visceral reaction changed!
One thing about Art (with a pretentious capital A, thankyou): have you ever noticed that one’s ability to appreciate it is so much more immediate when one views the pieces in person? The first time I saw “Starry Night” at the National Galleries, I suddenly got it. Of course, I’d seen photos and prints and posters of the painting all my life, but it was really different to have the thing in front of me. For painting, at least, I think that the ability to appreciate Art relates directly to one’s access to decent museums.
I think there may be an analogy to rock music. There are some bands that I never really “got” until I saw them play live.
Husker Du never got ‘popular’ — but it’s one of those bands that gets invoked in almost every appraisal of post-Nirvana (and like it or not, Nirvana is a huge dividing line) ‘alternative’ pop/rock. The band is one of the safest names to drop in terms of comparisons/influences.
It seems like them, the Pixies and either Sonic Youth or the Replacements (depending on the band/writer) are the holy trinity of modern/college/alternative/post-post-punk rock.
Great post idea! Here’s some of my “supposed to have” stuff:
* Beatles (sorry! Go ahead and flame me)
* Jimi Hendrix (except for “Hey Joe,” “Killing Floor (live),” and “Purple Haze,”)
* Led Zeppelin Live stuff – Love these guys, but they sound worse outside the studio
* Aerosmith
Enter Sandman
Agreed, and I’m a HUGE (vintage) Metallica fan. The self-titled album just didn’t do it for me. I think they just wanted to make videos and $$$ by putting this one out. I recommend …And Justice for All and Master of Puppets for the REAL DEAL. These guys rocked back when they thought nobody was listening. My favorite track on the self-titled is “Sad But True,” which sounds like an extension of “To Live is to Die” from Justice.
Another weird thing with me is I usually fall hard for a band’s “other” stuff (ie, the non-single non-video tracks), especially with modern rock (1990s and up).
William, the cover of Rolling Stone this month features an article which says that the young kids are heading back to the roots of artists like Hendrix and Zeppeling. Should be interesting to see what they do with it.
Nice to know all the people in the know agree with me about Husker Du. I never read that stuff.
It still pains me to see Bob Mould playing the Troubadour and worrying about money when he’s paved the way for so many other mediocre bands to be super-popular.
BTD Greg, “Starry Night” is my favorite all-time painting, and I’ve never seen it in person. It conjures up some of my first exposures to real Art when I was just a lad. It’s one of my rotating desktop wallpapers (via Panorama). Glad you mentioned it. A masterpiece indeed.
So sometimes “live exposure” isn’t necessary. But man, AC/DC, as lame as they are on the radio, was a DANG fun show, man. Razor’s Edge tour, all the way.
Susan, I’m somewhat ignernt about Bob Mould. What did he do that the Stooges and Ramones hadn’t done? In what unique way did he pave the way for other bands to be popular?
I have to admit that Husker Du’s Candy Apple Gray didn’t do much for me. I expected to like them because I like the Minutemen and for some reason I thought they were similar. But I have Candy Apple Gray on my iPod and I’ve only listened to it a few times and I don’t really want to listen again (although I’m sure I will). I guess you can add Husker Du to my should like but don’t like list.
That’s just it. You can’t judge them by one album. Their earlier stuff is much more punk rock. Allmusic.com can say it better than I can–from their review of Zen Arcade:
In many ways, it’s impossible to overestimate the impact of Hüsker Dü’s Zen Arcade on the American rock underground in the ’80s. It’s the record that exploded the limits of hardcore and what it could achieve. Hüsker Dü broke all of the rules with Zen Arcade. First and foremost, it’s a sprawling concept album, even if the concept isn’t immediately clear or comprehensible….
Flip Your Wig:
Flip Your Wig is pop played as punk, as if this is the only time these songs could ever be heard. Which means Hart’s love song “Green Eyes” and Mould’s pure pop single “Makes No Sense at All” are delivered with the same rage and passion as Mould’s blistering “Divide and Conquer” and Hart’s “Keep Hanging On,” or the pair of surging, neo-psychedelic and noise-wracked instrumentals that close the album. Flip Your Wig would be a remarkable record on its own terms, but the fact that it followed New Day Rising by a matter of months and Zen Arcade by just over a year is simply astonishing.
They also mention how a lot of their melodies are very 60′s pop influenced.
I remember listening to the radio in the 90′s and mourning the fact that Husker Du were too early to break into the mainstream. But they really helped set the stage for what happened when grunge broke and alternative became mainstream.
I love AC/DC. Can we start a guilty pleasures/bands you really shouldn’t like but do way more than is warranted anyway thread?
That was in re: to David J.
Allison, you’re a blogger here — start your thread!
Stupid thread. Just like what you like, and leave the rest, and don’t feel guilty about it.
I like James Taylor and Linda Ronstadt. And the works of Stephen Sondheim, George Gershwin and Richard Rodgers.
What’s your beef?
Susan’s right- Zen Arcade is the quintesential Husker Du- good place to start if you want a primer…
Allison, are you saying there’s something wrong with loving AC/DC?
As an educated person, I’m supposed to like opera. I’ve got to admit, though, that out of context and without any background in the operatic tradtion, it’s the hokiest thing I’ve ever seen. However, with some context, I can see why folks think it’s good. (I took an opera appreciation class in college to impress an vocal performance major that I was dating. I think it worked b/c she married me.) I think that Supergenius hit the nail on the head in #27. After a random listening to the Velvet Underground, you probably won’t get it. However, with some context and background, it makes a lot more sense.
I actually like some of the Velvet Underground. I really like Nico’s style and her stuff she did with them. Velveeta Underground, indeed!
Who am I supposed to like but hate? That honor would go to Bruce Springsteen.
I really like Kate Bush in theory, but, it just hasn’t happened yet. I hold out hope that one day I’ll like her.
DH is an unabashed disliker of R.E.M.
I would like to second Allison’s thread idea. I grew up entirely on radio rock and, as a result, have no clue about the secret underground history of rock. I never even heard of the Velvet Underground until I was in my 20′s. However, I take deep irrational enjoyment in Billy Joel and AC/DC. I know that these are acts that are frowned upon (or, at least, Joel is currently considered something of a hack), but the songs moved me and still do.
Also, I don’t like Zeppelin very much and I am really, really tired of the Police.
In other news, thanks to this website, I now really like Calexico and the Shins. He can be taught.
John C.
That is pretty amazing that you are tired of the Police. I’ve found that Message in a Box is actually more listenable than any of the greatest hits collections. Sting had some rigid rules that I think have given their songs a longer shelf life than most. One such rule was a strict limit on the length of any solos. Think of how many solos from other bands of that era now sound cheesey and self indulgent.
arJ,
It is sad but true. All Police songs sound sufficiently the same to me now that it is just one long song that I am really, really tired of and that local radio just won’t stop playing. I blame the bass.
I saw an interview with Sting the other night, and the reporter said he earns $2,000 a day on royalties from just one song. “Every Breath You Take.” $2,000. A day.
Well, you do hear G-Em-C-D in an awful lot of songs. Maybe Sting’s getting paid for all of them because they don’t know Jackson Browne’s current address.
(IIRC, “The Police” were credited with writing that song, which would mean that there’s $6,000 a day getting paid in royalties… $2,000 is hard enough to swallow)
Rusty #9, since this is the second time such a confusion has come up, I’m going to have to get a bit geeky on you here. “Equating” two non-identical objects always has to be with respect to some property. You’ve defined the property of being music that should be liked but isn’t. You’ve stated that the Cure, Peter Gabriel, and the Velvet Underground all have that property. Hence, with respect to that property, you’ve equated the three acts.
My expression of shock was at the idea that any meaningful category could possibly be created that would equate the Velvet Underground with those other musicians.
D.,
I know if I were to be counted as a true-blue-dyed-in-the-wool devotee of musical theater I should like Sondeim’s stuff. But generally I can’t stand it. Now, Gershwin and Rodgers, yes, Yes YES!
Oh, and I weep for anyone who can’t enjoy the Beatles. Boo-hoo…
HeHe, Jack, I was just making a point. I don’t care that most people don’t like Sondheim — I do. I also don’t care that most people think I’m some old-fashioned queen for liking musicals and Richard Rodgers in all his sentimental glory. I do. I love almost all music, particularly older popular music.
I also like U2, The Police (a lot), Sting without the Police, Jethro Tull, The Rolling Stones, The Who (a lot), The Beatles (a lot), The Beach Boys and Brian Wilson, Led Zeppelin, Bruce Springsteen, Madonna, Michael Jackson (through about 1988), Talking Heads, Sonic Youth, The Clash, Emmy Lou Harris, Willie Nelson, Linda Ronstadt, The Eagles, Dave Brubeck, Ella Fitzgerald, Billie Holiday, Louis Armstrong, Miles Davis, Joni Mitchell, James Taylor, Carole King, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Patsy Kline, Petula Clark, Billy Joel, John Coltrane, Stravinsky, Copland, Philip Glass, Steve Reich, Berg, Wolf, Verdi, Puccini, Chopin, Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Purcell, Ives, Palestrina, Rossini, Bernstein, Arlen, Porter, Berlin, Dolly Parton, Beck, and Cher.
Some dislikes: not terribly fond of Wagner, Elton John, Cage, any of the Sondheim clones like LaChuisa or Jason Robert Brown, or any of the Mormon wannabees except Cundick (I’m particularly down on Mack Wilberg’s work). And truthfully, I don’t know hiphop at all, though what I’ve heard from Queen Latifah, I’ve liked.
Roasted Tomatoes,
I might be the only person here that has noted that Rusty only dislikes old bands, bands from 20-30 years ago, hence the “equation” of Velvet Underground with The Cure and Peter Gabriel. It’s fashionable and cool to dislike bands from before one’s time. It takes real courage to stand up for the music of one’s parents.
D,
You’re joking, right? Most of my music library consists of classic rock. I’ve got every Zeppelin album, lots of Pink Floyd, The Who, Stones, Beatles, Van Morrison, all the goodies. In fact, I’m more comfortable listening to all that stuff than I am to newer music. I even have a soft spot for Bille Holliday, Ella Fitzgerald, Benny Goodman, Elvis and Sinatra. Trust me, I like the old stuff.
I did mention The Strokes, REM and Metallica on my list. They’re not from before my time.
Someone needs to do a post on Sam Cooke.
LOVE Sam Cooke. Love all the Motown stuff, and later great bands like Earth, Wind and Fire.
There are certain artists I think of as universal, as in I expect everyone to like them. They include Van Morrison, Nick Drake, the great motown artists (Sam Cooke, Aretha Franklin, Supremes, Smokey Robinson/the Miracles, the Spinners, etc).
AL GREEN!
Bob Dylan annoys me.
especially since that Victoria’s Secret thing.
Guilty pleasures? How fun!
* Iron Maiden. I’m a bassist of 16+ years, and these guys have a GREAT bassist. Lyrically cool, too.
* Judas Priest. Nobody sings like Rob Halford. Nobody.
* Primus. It’s a bass thing (again).
* Anthrax. All the goodies rolled into one – a good singer, a great guitarist, and power chords galore… All amped up on a stack of Marshall amps 3 stories high.
* (vintage) Dave Matthews. Trendy? Probably. Musically? Heck yeah, these guys are “musician’s musicians.”
* Rush. I used to ditch school when I was 14-15 years old to listen to Signals, Power Windows, and Moving Pictures on an old Walkman. Musically brilliant (older stuff, anyway).
* Metallica. Again, pre-1990, these guys are just amazing.
* Ozzy Osbourne. Every metal-head should own a copy of “Speak of the Devil” or “Tribute”
* Tesla. Northern California hair band butt-rock at its 80s best!
Pingback: Kulturblog » Guilty Pleasures