Music Snob

I am a self described music snob. I readily admit it. Actually, I'm kind of proud of it. It means I have high standards. I don't, scratch that, can't accept what the mainstream says is good. Just because lots of people like it doesn't mean it's any good. Music is a visceral experience to me. I appreciate it on its own. Tones, words, heart, soul, passion, love, anger, despression, happiness. These things all speak to me in music. Not all music can speak to me though. Pop music, for the most part, does nothing for me, as does rap, country, death metal, or most r&b (new not old Motown stuff). There are many artists that I listen to that I'd call "poppy", but they have something deeper that trancends them above pop. In fact there's something there, I listen to artists because music is an art form, a type of expression. Then there are those that are performers. Example, The Beatles were artists, Herman's Hermits were performers. Sheryl Crow is an artist (though one I don't listen to), Britney Spears is a performer. There are those that I'd consider to be performers in my collection, but I wouldn't put them towards my favorite lists. Yes, I do have a KISS CD! But only 1, I have 40+ R.E.M. CDs (singles, albums, bootlegs)
Another point that I'd like to make is about why people say they love music. I've had a friend say that he loves music. He can associate songs with various points in his life, whether it be a song from that period or a new one with pertinent lyrics. That's fine, but I really don't think of that as a music lover. That's a memory lover, the music just reminds him of those memories. Smells do the same thing. I don't need a memory to associate with a song, the song is the memory.
For a while though, I was starting to think that I was losing my love for it. It happened as with most when they age that they don't like anything new. "All new music stinks" is what you'd hear. And they'll stick with what they know. That's another thing about associating songs with memories, you stick with the old memories, then all you have is old songs, no room for anything new. That didn't happen to me, but I hadn't found anything new to be passionate about. There were the bands that I liked and they're great and I looked forward to their new releases. There were new ones coming out that I'd find value to and like, but nothing that I really went nuts for. A prime example of this was when I really discovered R.E.M. I didn't like R.E.M. except for Stand, and maybe The One I Love, but I didn't really know their stuff. This was before Out Of Time came out in '90. Then I heard Losing My Religion, and was blown away. It was genius, didn't know how at the time, just that it was. It took about 8 months and I had every album up to that point, and started getting the singles because they had extra stuff. Then eagerly awaiting the new albums, then they finally went on tour. Saw them twice the first time, and 16 more since then. Only The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pearl Jam, Neil Young, and The Smashing Pumpkins would I put in that category (the Pumpkins though lost some steam towards the end of their run). Since Pearl Jam though, there hasn't been anything for me to go after like that. I was beginning to think that I'd just fall into the same pattern that many aging people do where "the new stuff is bad, give me what I know." True, most new stuff is bad, the list is too long to even start. There was hope though for me when I found Wilco. Remember I said I don't like country? They're considered Alt-country, technically a fusion of country with punk sensibilities (isn't that an oxymoron?). And I love them. Absolute genius. The first album (A.M.) is country rock. The second (Being There) is country rock folk. The third (Summerteeth) is dark pop and folk and rock. The fourth (Yankee Hotel Foxtrot) is avant-garde. The fifth (A Ghost is Born) is folk, pop, avant garde, country. As the announcer said for their appearance on Austin City Limits, "And now a band that can do anything." That's about right.
I can enjoy being a music snob again!