I have a friend that does that actually. I suppose it comes naturally to some, like he typically likes music the first time he hears it somehow, so whatever works I suppose.
Ooh, I should try that sometime. I tried that once, it sounded pretty good. It takes a while to find music that flows into each other naturally, and most of the time the artist (if the album is good enough) has already done that for you.
He’s an artist that is impossible to like. He plays bad on purpose, like, a lot of flats and sharps, and is just painful and exhausting to hear. I’ve had a lot of patience with the guy, but it’s just not working. I should give him another shot one of these days though…maybe someday I’ll like his stuff.
I don’t have a problem with that, I can get burnt out and just prefer listening to something else, I’ve never gottent to the point where music actually gets annoying to me.
Well, I don’t get tired of music, I just get tired of the artist, or the album really quick, and generally I find I get a lot more out of it by listening to it a maximum of once per day than if I were to listen to it twice per day instead. Like, Joni Mitchell’s Blue, a really really good album, I listened to it twice per day for a long time, and I got burnt out from it. That was too bad, because it’s really, really good.
- Some albums/artists are better in certain seasons, for instance, Bruce Springsteen in the summer, and Bob Dylan in late fall/winter. Enjoy them in their right seasons, for the most part.
Funny. I’d definitely put Springsteen on winter and Dylan on summer. Well, whatever, we get to listen to them at the same time.
hahaha, I play this one a bit looser than most of the other ones. If I feel like listening to something, usually I do, just I find when an artist is “out of season” per se, I don’t enjoy it as much as I would if it were the “right” season.
Also, if it’s not something you’re used to, go check a music encyclopedia (yeah, sure, wikipedia will do if you have nothing better) to learn the language. You can actually appreciate jazz a lot better if you understand how a song is split in parts and how they work; and you cannot ever appreciate hip hop without understanding what’s at play there — the closest you’ll get to hip hop without knowing their culture is being a crazy «yo ma, look at me, I’m from da hood» poseur.
Interesting. I found that with sports, like European Football or American Football, that if I knew what one team was trying to accomplish by using a particular tactic, I enjoyed it a lot more than if I was just watching it clueless. I never would have thought that this idea might carry over to music…
Nice to see your routine, I’ve got to put it to practise one of these days and see what happens.
Hehehe, it’s less of a routine and more of a code of law
- Never skip a song on an album (unless it’s irritating, like Mother on Synchronicity, even though I actually like the song now).
I don’t know man, the song was placed there for a reason. If you listen to it you might get a message that you didn’t get if you skip it. This has happened to me before.
Mother, by the Police Some songs are just unlistenable. Never is a strong word, which is why I used it, but there are songs which deserve to be skipped.
- After 30-40 listens, you may listen to single songs off of an album, though it’s still frowned upon.
What, are you crazy? Maybe after two listens for me. That’s enough time for the album’s message, if any, to sink in. After that, I listen to favorite tunes. But I still go back and listen to the whole album though.
Meh, do what you like, I’ll do it mine. I get a lot more out of listening to full albums than I ever will with single songs. I find the “hits” that people tend to like upon the first listen are usually my least favourite track by the time I get around to the later stations in my listening, and that the album tracks that radio stations overlook are much better songs.
- Patience with new albums.
Of course, although I tend to not have as much patience with The Stones as I would … The Beatles. They were never creative with there stuff and most of their songs were filler (Stones). The only exception being Their Satanic Majesties, one of my favorite albums of all time.
Well, unless you were listening to their 80’s stuff, what I am about to say is completely void, I completely understand. The Rolling Stones were very crappy in the 80’s, quite frankly, they stopped trying, and they sucked. However, to brush aside Aftermath, Between the Buttons, Sticky Fingers, Beggars Banquet, Exile On Main Street and Let It Bleed as “filler” shows that you really need to listen to them more than twice to “get” them. Because Exile On Main Street is certainly not filler, neither are any of the albums that I’ve mentioned. All of them, at worst, are very solid works, and at best are straight up masterpieces. They may not be the Beatles, but they are certainly pretty close.
Music snobs
Not for me, I can listen to some stuff all day if I feel like it. But I have to be in a certain mood to begin with to listen to a whole album.
Fair enough, they tend to get old pretty quick that way though, for me at least.
I have to say I do not like your set of rules man. I mean, yes there are faux pas, like patience with an album, but you seem to have made music into a science, which is wrong!
What are you, one of ‘em creationists! Not likin’ Science? aheeh heeh heeh!
Fair enough, my style isn’t to your liking. I do have it down as a science, it is true. Still, under this science of mine, I’ve enjoyed music more in the past 1-2 years under it than I have away from it.
But, anyway, why is this science wrong? Other than calling it that, you didn’t really give any reason as to why you dislike it.