on 3/16/03 8:47 PM, Julian at germ@iinet.net.au wrote:
Hmm yes, but you seem to be side-stepping the point slightly. I wasn't so much talking about those four albums in particular. You said something about 'Revolver', for example, having a certain 'fresh' quality which would or could still be perceived by a new listener today. I wouldn't disagree, but you seemed to be ignoring the large number of people who might not care for it, whether they heard it the day it came out, or today. I'm not saying that I'm necessarily one of those people.
I don't think I know anybody who really cares about music who doesn't have certain time-tested genre classics which they love, even if those genres are painful for this crowd to think of (big fans of Eagles/Jimmy Buffett type stuff). I guess my thinking is that different people have different tastes, but their basic need for music that represents something akin to heritage is something that runs through music consumers of every genre, whether it be be bop or hair metal. I hope this answers the question more fully. It's a great question that invites a lot of thought. As for "certain ways to listen to a given piece of work", I didn't mean that as "there is the one true way". But you do have to be open to whatever that piece of music may have in store, and you have to be in a mental place where you're receptive to whatever is designed into that music, or you'll just plain miss out on what it has to offer. That's the "how" aspect for me. I listen to a lot of really frenetic stuff as background music when I'm stressed, just so I feel like the atmosphere is right up in it with me, if you know what I'm saying. -- skip h http://www.skipheller.com