Grex Music2 Conference

Item 95: The "Age Drift" Item

Entered by orinoco on Sat Nov 8 16:52:31 1997:

Just excising some drift from the Prog Rock item...
#18 of 25: by Ken Josenhans (krj) on Fri, Nov  7, 1997 (19:30):
 I have a theory which holds that everyone ends up hating the music
 they listened to when they were sixteen years old.  When I was sixteen,
 I listened to Jethro Tull, Pink Floyd, ELP, and Yes.  So I'll just
 sort of sit this one out...  :)

#19 of 25: by Jon the Arborean (lumen) on Fri, Nov  7, 1997 (19:53):
 I ain't everyone :P

#20 of 25: by Gratuitous Saxon Violins (orinoco) on Fri, Nov  7, 1997 (22:51):
 Hmm...well, I must say, Ken, you did have good taste as a 16-year-old.
 <wonders what went wrong :) >

#21 of 25: by Mike McNally (mcnally) on Fri, Nov  7, 1997 (23:15):
  re #19:  give it time..

  I certainly can't serve as a counter-example to Ken's postulate
  and believe that it makes a certain amount of sense..

#22 of 25: by Cricket (teflon) on Fri, Nov  7, 1997 (23:46):
 As a sixteen year old, I dare say that I like the stuff well enough now.
  I certainly hope that doesn't change, 'though I dare say it might if I
 go and over-play the stuff.  The main problem with that theory is this:
  I like almost every kind of music, which means, according to your
 postulate, that I will become an exclusively Rap/R&B fan when I'm older.
  Now, it is concievable that I might grow to like them, but dislike the
 other stuff?  Not likely.

Go forth and discuss...
35 responses total.

#1 of 35 by diznave on Sun Nov 9 05:05:36 1997:

Hey Ken, we listened to some of the same music when we were 16. I still enjoy
the groups you mentioned, but unfortunately, at 16 I was also listening to
crap (IMHO) like Boston, AC/DC, Kansas, Van Halen, Blue Oyster Cult, Lynard
Skynard, Molly Hatchet, and the Eagles  <Dave braces himself for the critical
onslaught regarding his opinion of the Eagles>.


#2 of 35 by orinoco on Sun Nov 9 16:40:22 1997:

No, I'm in full agreement with you on that one.
(Does that mean I'll be liking them in 20 years?  Eek!)
Of course, I'm still not _technically_ 16 yet - 7 more hours to go - so I've
still got time to find some crap to listen to so I can hate it later.


#3 of 35 by anderyn on Sun Nov 9 22:02:50 1997:

Erm geeze. I still love Blue Oyster Cult! And I don't think of them as
crap at all. Though, of course, I was introduced to them as an adult, 
in the early eighties, and so I guess they're not a sixteen-year-old thang
for me. I was sixteen in the early seventies, and hated disco then, hate
it now. I don't think I listened to much music then besides some sappy
Paul Anka, Elvis, and -- oh *blush* -- Leonard Nimoy. Still like Elvis,
though.


#4 of 35 by teflon on Mon Nov 10 02:33:14 1997:

Whew.  I was afraid I was the only BOC fan around, and I would have to 
defend them single handedly against an onslaught of folks who think it's 
"crap".  (Watch what you insult Grr.  Grr.)  I dunno.  This is probably 
the wrong item for me to be in, and I should come back to it in about 5 
years.


#5 of 35 by anderyn on Mon Nov 10 14:31:17 1997:

No, no, stay! Any BOC fan is cool by me! 

Funnily enoguh, last night what should paly on Dr. Demento but "The
Hobbit" as inimitably sung by Leonard Nimoy? Grin.

Rhiannon has stolen my _Workshop of the Telescopes_ double BOC 
disk and won't give it back, too! (Of course, she IS sixteen, so I guess
that doesn't count.)


#6 of 35 by lumen on Tue Nov 11 05:56:53 1997:

You mean "The Ballad of Bilbo Baggins"?  Good song :)


#7 of 35 by diznave on Wed Nov 12 17:54:19 1997:

Okay, let me rephrase what I said. I recently (in the past year) listened to
a Blue Oyster Cult album. It was one of the worst things I've ever heard. That
said, I've heard *very* little Blue Oyster Cult, ever. Way back when I first
heard them (beginning of the 80's), I only had one or two of their albums.
So my BOC exposure is extremely limited. I think _Don't Fear The Reaper_ and
_Godzilla_ were the only two tunes that got played regularly on the radio.
What is your favorite BOC album? Which albums would you recommend? 


#8 of 35 by teflon on Fri Nov 14 02:21:22 1997:

Well, I don't have a whole lot of their stuff, but 'Secret Treaties' is really
cool.  Let me ask you, was the album you listened to a live recording?


#9 of 35 by diznave on Fri Nov 14 11:16:00 1997:

No, it was the one that had a kind of dinasaur on the cover. I want to say
the title is _Tyrannosaurus Rex_, but I know that's not right. It sounded like
a studio album to me.

Ok, I'll check out _Secret Treaties_.


#10 of 35 by teflon on Fri Nov 14 19:39:20 1997:

right.  Now that we've got that settled, does anyone have anything to say on
topic?  I know that when I was a pre-teen, I was a fan of a lot of the junk
that was being played on the radio... Most of it strikes me as junk now, but
there are some things I still like.  Of course, I still enjoy listening to
the radio now... They always play the same stuff over and over, it's like
having a tape player.


#11 of 35 by krj on Sun Nov 23 08:17:55 1997:

I evolved my initial theory, that most people come to hate the music
they liked when they were 16, after discovering that a friend who 
adored Jefferson Airplane when she was 16 (and they were a current band)
could no longer stand to listen to them.  
 
Most of y'all aren't old enough to test my hypothesis yet.
 
It's been interesting watching further "age drift" in myself.
Becoming an opera fan at the age of 30 was certainly an unexpected
turn; of course, dating a singer can make an opera enthusiast out of 
anyone.
 
I also had a shtick I was doing for a while, about how I was giving up 
on rock music for my 40th birthday.  While there was some exxageration
in my display, there was also a core of truth to it.  The last time 
I found a new rock band who I loved was in 1990; since then I've wasted 
piles of money and time chasing in hopes of finding another one, 
and I think it is just time to give up.  I'm somewhat sad about this, 
but I'm also a realist.

It's been observed that the age of the audience for the alt.country 
stuff is weighted quite a bit older than the rock audience.  
Some people argue that country, in both the mainstream and alt.
varieties, is more likely to appeal to listeners who have been kicked 
around a bit by life and love.



#12 of 35 by scott on Sun Nov 23 13:28:43 1997:

I've met a lot of people who are *still* stuck on the music they 
listened to in high school.

Relevant Quote from a bar musician:
"People know what they like, and they like what they know".


#13 of 35 by omni on Sun Nov 23 21:46:22 1997:

  re 11. I'll be 38 in a few days. I still have the records (i.e vinyl)
that I had when I was 16. Can't really say I hate them, but I don't play them
because I lack a viable platform (OK, I do have a record player. Just cant
stand all them scratches and pops. CD's ruined me!) I do like the music.
I have Cat Stevens, Chicago, Chuck Mangione, Doc Severenson, Journey,
Fleetwood Mac, Heart, Queen (no comments) and a few other forgettable acts.
Still play them once in a while.

  I would rather listen to Bob Dylan. I should have listened to him when I
was 16, but didn't and now, I have a lot of discovery to do.


#14 of 35 by lumen on Wed Nov 26 06:44:53 1997:

Why no comments on Queen?  Forgettable acts?  A few that you mentioned are
very noteworthy-- I would have to say Queen was *very* influential, and
Fleetwood Mac did make an impressive appearance recently.  Cat Stevens-- he
doesn't call himself that anymore-- is still a noted figure in folk rock/folk
pop-- I've been learning the guitar, and a few of his songs are in my
instruction book as examples (and the author is British).


#15 of 35 by omni on Wed Nov 26 17:14:52 1997:

  You're right. Queen was very influential, and they did have a hell of an
act, which is why I bought 2 of thier albums. Nothing wrong with Fleetwood
Mac, either. Like I said, these records problems are not age, It's mainly
sound. If I had them all on CD, I'd be a very happy camper.


#16 of 35 by lumen on Wed Nov 26 19:27:07 1997:

Oh-- gotcha.  The NIN vinyl item had a discussion on LPs in general.  I was
suspecting it was the sound quality, but it didn't seem entirely clear.


#17 of 35 by krj on Wed Nov 26 20:01:19 1997:

Jim -- how do you see Queen as "influential?"


#18 of 35 by orinoco on Wed Nov 26 23:18:50 1997:

Well, I'd hazard that any band that becomes famous is also influential to some
extent regardless.  I don't really know enough about Queen to comment...


#19 of 35 by mcnally on Thu Nov 27 05:47:26 1997:

 re #17:  Yeah, I was kinda wondering that myself but decided to let it
 pass because while it's entirely possible they had a huge influence on
 many groups the types of groups they'd've influenced are not ones I'd 
 be likely to be listening to..  Still, I'd be interested in hearing the
 names of a few acts just to see if I recognize any of them..


#20 of 35 by omni on Thu Nov 27 16:48:21 1997:

   I'd say they brought the synthesyser into wide use, and of course they
proved that a long song (B. Rhapsody) could be as popluar as a short one. Also
according to PopUpVideo, they brought the art of the video into the
mainstream. So on those counts, Queen was successfully influential.


#21 of 35 by orinoco on Thu Nov 27 19:33:24 1997:

I had thought of Bohemian Rhapsody as more of a novelty song than anything
else.


#22 of 35 by omni on Fri Nov 28 03:16:11 1997:

  Long songs are generally called "shit songs" because it allows the DJ to
go to the can while it's playing. Pardoni mi Italiano.


#23 of 35 by orinoco on Fri Nov 28 18:05:19 1997:

<g>  Never heard that one before.


#24 of 35 by omni on Fri Nov 28 18:57:14 1997:

  I have a few friends who used to be DJ's.


#25 of 35 by tpryan on Sat Nov 29 15:47:42 1997:

        I have been a DJ, and I never called them 'shit songs'.  Maybe
bathroom break' songs.  Then again with planning a 3 and a half minute
song would do.  Cue up the next quickly and up and go.  If I didn't 
make it back in time (rarely didn't) someone could quickly start the
next tune.  Usually the five minute network newscast was long enough.

        On the changes in taste relating to age.  I consider it more
a matter of time.  I have been in my third discovery of folk music
for about the ten-twelve years now.  But I still listen to Classic
Rock, Oldies, The River, other alternative rock, but tend to avoid
new metal/industrial rock.


#26 of 35 by omni on Sat Nov 29 18:02:34 1997:

  I recently heard the new BB King/Tracy Chapman duet. Man, It blew me away.
but the song that followed made me want to change the station. :(

  I may have to score that CD before too long.


#27 of 35 by orinoco on Sat Nov 29 21:21:11 1997:

They did a whole CD together?  Whoa...


#28 of 35 by omni on Sun Nov 30 02:54:42 1997:

 According to my sister, BB did a whole bunch of duets with people. I don't
 know all the details, but that one track rocked. (The Thrill is Gone...)
If that one track is represenitive, it's gonna be a monster.


#29 of 35 by lumen on Sun Nov 30 09:37:27 1997:

btw, 'shit' is not Italian-- it's German, coming from the word 'sheist' (or
however it would be spelled)


#30 of 35 by orinoco on Sun Nov 30 18:07:29 1997:

(What would the equivalent be in Italian, I wonder...)


#31 of 35 by omni on Sun Nov 30 20:39:42 1997:

 I meant that in the spirit of "Pardon my French" but I don't do French. I
do Italian and Spanish. Shit in spanish is mierda, so I would assume that 
it would either be the same in Italian, or something close to it.


#32 of 35 by bruin on Sun Nov 30 23:16:19 1997:

Nowadays, with the technology of CD's and such, a DJ could plug several 
songs into a computer and not have to worry about whether it would be 
long enough to take care of his/her obligations to the pot.


#33 of 35 by void on Mon Dec 1 08:15:08 1997:

   "bohemian rhapsody," when it came out, spent some ungodly long time
at the top of the charts in britain...close to five or six months, if
i remember correctly. i was living in england at the time, so i have
no idea if the song did as well in the states. queen was also one of
the first bands to include elaborate sets and pyrotechnics in their
live performances, which undoubtedly influenced many of the glitzy
bands of the later seventies and early eighties, none of whom pulled
it off nearly as well as queen did, imho. and then there was brian
may's guitar playing and freddy mercury's singing, which speak for
themselves. (and, btw, _a night at the opera_, the album which has
"bohemian rhapsody" on it, was produced without synthesizers.)


#34 of 35 by lumen on Tue Dec 2 07:32:05 1997:

That was what was cool about Freddie.  He was talented *and* popular.  Synth
is good if you keep it tight and can do incredible things with it, but it
doesn't make up for a lack of musicianship.  I don't remember the source--
it was some sort of TV documentary-- quoted someone in the band, I think, as
saying Mercury was always bubbling over with ideas.


#35 of 35 by raven on Thu Mar 19 07:20:37 1998:

I don't hate the music I listened to when I was 16, but I don't listen to
it much.  I was mainly into punk like the Dead Kennedies, Circle Jerks,
etc, and classic rock like Jefferson Airplane, The Beatles, Pink Floyd,
Emerson Lake & Palmer (yikes), Bob Dylan, Velvet Underground (OK I still
listen to them a fair amount).  I also listened to some jazz fusion around
age 16-17 like Weather Report, that I would still listen to now.  I would
say I listen to a broader range of music now & music from my high school
days may strike me as a bit flat, but I don't actively despise that music. 
The only things I can think of from that time that I listened to that I
can't deal with now would be Rush, Iron Butterfly, ELP, and probably some
really bad 2 chord punk 45s and to a lesser extent Crosby, Stills & Nash. 



There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: