genre specialists

wow, you mean that you REALLY have absolutely ZERO capacity for detecting bullshit/insincerity/pretension? you must be an adman/politicians dream - in fact you are the future of the human race - you can sell the idea of cloning to governments and mncs, single-handed.

im forest gump - no im forest gump - no im forest gump

Virtually no one aside from the irregular poster Arf Arf seems to challenge it.

Bob Snoom is OTM.

No way. In the past couple of days plenty of ILMers have asserted that they can tell when people are "pretending to like music," and that doing so makes such pretenders fake, shallow people. Wherein I challenge that worrying about what other people is more fake and shallow, and no one agrees with me.

I sort of agree. I like to read genre specialists getting passionate about whatever it is they're into, but they're prob not the best place to go for recommendations.

As for people "pretending" to like something, I've no doubt that it's done all the time, but there is no bullet-proof way of knowing when this is. Maybe if they are very keen to stress that they like something, but can't seem to go into much detail about it when pushed. I recall a friend of mine complaining that his newly-acquired girlfriend annoyed him, because she pretended to like all the music he did to impress him, but couldn't name a single track by said artists. Oddly, she tried to impress him by being as big a Dave Matthews Band fan as he was, ha! But music-snobby types would generally have an album that they are "pretending they like", so unless you sit by their stereo and see how often they put the record on, you can never know, and suspicions will remain unconfirmed in your head.

On the other hand, you get Latin music experts like Chino trying to convince me to buy some Larry Harlow concept album from the 70's, when I don't especially like Larry Harlow or concept albums, and what I really want is some Tito Gomez and Puerto Rican Power CDs, which he would consider "bubble gum salsa." (This may be less a clash between an expert and a generalist than it is a clash between priorities. He is more interested in salsa which makes a grand statement or which draws heavily on jazz; I am interested in something that is going to make me want to dance and forget myself.)

The specialist always has the advantage of having a broader range of choices to pick from, within a genre. It's true though: they can be so hung up on finding the unknown gem that they will neglect to recommend the canonical works which have a history of appealing to many listeners. But don't the experts give final shape to the canon? Am I babbling or what?

*

Bob Snoom is indeed OTM.

Doesn't this happen all the time anyway? It seems like you see that phenomenon everywhere on ILM.

The thing about recommendations is that the genre-specialist wants a thrill out of it too: if you go to a salsa expert asking for music, and he gives you the top ten most popular salsa records ever, that means he's going to have to listen to you go on about them, all the while he's nodding his head "yeah yeah yeah" and thinking about whatever it is he's on to now. I mean, how much fun would it be for a math genius to recommend I go take Algebra 101?

Still, finding people who consistently give good recs is like finding a stash of diamonds in my attic.

That's broadly true although very occasionally people do give themselves away unambiguously. Obviously there are other times when you just have suspicions. Despite hstencil's impression I did not claim I could tell when people were pretending (hstencil check the original thread if you don't believe me). But as Naomi suggests we all go through life making judgements about whether people are telling us the truth or not. We develop an ability to spot misrepresentations of the truth by politicians, salesmen, advertisers or just people who want us to be impressed by them. It's a very inexact science and we all get it wrong from time to time.

A few years ago my brother had a girlfriend who was interested in getting into jazz and asked for some advice. On her birthday I bought her two albums, "Somethin' Else" (Cannonball Adderley) and "A Love Supreme". I said ALS was probably not really a beginner's album but was worth persisting with.

A week or two later I asked if she liked the albums. She said yes, but I had been wrong about ALS needing repeated listening, it was wonderful, she had really liked it immediately. Which was fine.

Some weeks later, I again mentioned the albums. Having obviously forgotten our earlier conversation, she admitted she'd not really found time to listen to them.

(Odd that the example I remember best happened to involve a woman - I'm sure men are infinitely more likely to do this kind of thing).

hstencil I can't understand why you think it's wrong to take an interest in why people behave in this way. In any case, developing some sort of ability to tell when people are being dishonest is too basic a survival mechanism for us to be able switch it off just because we are discussing music; why would we want to?

I think that linking theorist A to album/artist B is like some cheap academic parlor trick usually (sez the guy who's shopping around the article he's got on Ja Rule and Gramsci) coz even more interesting is knowing enuf about Exile and Kristeva to explain why trying to relate the two is no use at all.

I think that acting a like or dislike of something while listening is a good and useful listening strategy, too - listening with positive/negative ears, working out what someone who likes something might get out of it, and what that someone might be like too.

And yet, it remains true, that if someone is parading their "better" taste in music it is even more irritating if there is evidence that their "better" taste is an affectation. Here's an extract of a review of Uri Caine's band in The Wire:

"The Hancock influence always shows through...........Caine was happiest on songs like "Nefertiti" and "One Finger Snap", where he unashamedly drew on the lucky numbers of Hancock's melodic and harmonic vocabulary, all sharp fives and nines and dominant sevens."

If this means anything, it is that "sharp fives and nines and dominant sevens" are particularly characteristic of Herbie Hancock. Which just isn't true. All modern jazz musicians use these harmonies, and Herbie doesn't use them more than most other pianists. For various reasons, Herbie is particularly associated with it is the sus chord, but that is a compositional thing more than an improvisational one.

IMO this is pretentious, pure and simple. And the evidence is clear cut. And it DOES matter, because the reviewer is being dishonest and misleading. And maybe I am being overly judgemental, but I'm afraid hold him in contempt as a result.

I agree, but the fact is, people will frequently amend their tastes to appear "better", wheter it's absurd or not. I'm sure we've all done it once or twice. I know i have...

That's not exactly what I'm saying; I'm saying that it's kind of ridiculous to care in a "hey they're just pretending, they don't really care like I do" way. People respond to music all sorts of ways. Obviously for some, music serves a social function, only. Does it for me? Partially, but not totally, and even that bit that does, I still don't feel like I have to claim to "pretend to like something." Still, I don't really care if someone else does or not, because it's really not that interesting to me to determine someone else's motives in music.

Which is why I think it's completely disingenuous (sp?) to compare someone lying about the music they like to someone lying about other, more consequential things. That's ridiculous. Whether or not someone likes a fucking record is not a life-or-death thing (but then again, maybe to some people here it is? I just don't see the reason why).

Actually it was a fairly negative review of Caine's performance, partly on the basis of his being too immitative of Hancock. Even if he was, he wasn't for the reasons suggested. But the technical analysis was being offered to justify a dislike.

I agree that's not evidence that his dislike is pretended. But how far can a reviewer who is dishonest about what he knows be trusted to be honest about what he likes?

hstencil, as on another thread, you argue against a number of things you seem to believe I've said (or meant to say). I didn't say or mean any of the things you take exception to.

It depends on what q you're ans: if she's asking 'What kind of music do you like?' then I think it does sound dishonest.

This is VERY true. If there's anything a genre specialist is best at, it's recommending the best album(s) in an artist's catalog. As I'd hinted at before, my friends that are big on metal tend to mostly listen to metal records about 90% of the time. I suppose this instills some kind of thoroughness into them, as they tend to be the types who buy an entire artists's discography once they find one they really enjoy. Whereas, I'd much rather get one or two of the best records and move on. So, a genre specialist would be in a much better position to recommend which album to go for, simply because they will have heard many more.

As for "pretending" to like music... This does happen but it seems as if it's an accusation that's thrown around much more than would really be valid. I'm sure many people here have a story where they've caught someone in a web of lies. I remember when a friend had told me how much he'd liked the Dillinger Escape Plan when he'd seen them with his brother, who was big into hardcore at the time. Then, when I was playing an album of theirs in my car a few months later, he made a completely disgusted look on his face and said something like, "WHAT IS THIS???"

"Well, it's that band you said you loved, hahaha."

And then he's like, "Oh yeah, they were great!"

But then again, I've been accused of pretending to like music many, many times and this is something I don't think I do. I think it's something that just comes with the territory when you like to listen to music from all different genres. Invariably, you'll find someone who says, "You can't like both X and Y! I think you're just trying to seem hip, well-rounded, etc. You are a fraud, sir!"

It depends on what q you're ans: if she's asking 'What kind of music do you like?' then I think it does sound dishonest.

Yeah, I'll agree with this. When asked what kind of music I like, I generally say, "mostly metal and electronic, with a pop single here and there" or something. It's a very broad, simplified view of what I enjoy, though it is mostly true. While I do like quite a bit of music, these are the areas I come back to most.

But if you're just speaking off the cuff, it seems perfectly sane to me.