what's your least favorite music?
 

Lets see which group gets the biggest response:
a) classical
b) rock
c) rap
d) country
e) dance/techno

I wanted to post this as a running total survey, but don't know how. Anybody have a clue?

Rap...can't handle that shit.

country.
no question.

Rap.

Perhaps you should add a poll?

All of the above.

(poll) what is your least favorite music?
 

Please vote your choice

I'd rather listen to Lawrence Welk play his accordian than listen to rap.

rap with dance/techno running a close second

as far as country, i hate the new country that gets played all the time the past few years (i.e. Garth Brooks, etc.) but like a lot of the older stuff (Willie Nelson, Waylon Jennings, Hank Williams, Johnny Cash, etc.) and love most bluegrass.

I would have to go with Dance/Techno, followed by Country.

Congratulations.

that's a pretty broad way of doing a poll. I love elements of all music. I love Rock for example but am not a fan of bands like Blink or Good Charlotte for example. You need to have a broader poll I think

Yeah I'm too eclectic to pin myself down to one genre.

Asta!!

I can't stand Rap...it drives me crazy!!!!

down with rap!

EDIT: Didn't know thread was combined.....

country all the way. can't stand it.

I picked Country so long as what you are referring to is what I call "Nashville Pop" (ie Shania Twain, Garth Brooks, Dixie Chicks, Brooks and Dunn, etc.) I DO like Johnny Cash, Hank Williams Sr., etc.

I'm not a big fan of Country...but then again, Rap (music?) also makes me climb the walls as well. But even among those two genres, there are a few, albeit precious few, pieces that I can actualy enjoy. I am extremely eclectic in my choice of music. It really all depends on my mood of the day.

Rap uugh

but.. I would have to ask you to define "Techno"

rap, i can hardly be in earshot of it

Yup about the same. I like country especially the bluegrass pickers and jazz just because it seems to jive with me. Don't mind the blues to much but when it gets repetitative I find it boring. Same with trad jazz, like Jim Hall or someone. It's nice but after a while it is all the same. Prefer jazz fusion more. More fun to play also.

dance&trance
same beat, same lyrics(if any)

I see you've figured it out...better would have been to pm a mod at some point to help you keep things clean..

anyways, i've merged the threads.

so few choices...but regardless...country gets my vote (except for Johnny Cash).

not a fan of shitty pop, rap, adult contemporary, most punk, most hip-hop, rockabilly, most ska, most reggae, 'jam' bands (greatful dead, phish, etc) ... and that's all I can think of.

shit, sounds like i don't like much ... but, trust me, I've a large collection of music I *do* like.

oh, and I respect good musicians of all genres.

I had to pick country music.Because sometimes rap sounds pretty good with some rock instrumentals playing in the background when their rapping/singing..

As broad as this poll is, my vote has to go to country. I dont know that I've ever heard a coutry song that I've really liked. I've heard a few that I can tolerate, but nothing I'd ever spend money on.

A good Rap song can sound good to my ears, but country? No, no, no, can't stand that. Except 'When Devil went down to Georgia.'

OI!! to my fellow DnB fan!!! :thumbsup:

Where's rockabilly?

<B>I would like to know when facility with a tape deck became a musical skill.</b> With all due respect to those of you who do enjoy techno, from where I sit, it's the equivalent of fapping to the Titty Board. Someboday takes something beautiful they found, and puts it out there, and then you look at it and perform a repetitive, if pleasing, motion.

At the risk of falling into the same trap myself, techo (particularly the varieties called Trance and House) consists entirely of none to long or complex snippets of other people's work repeated ad naseum, and then ad infinitum. If, say, Stairway to Heaven is a Van Gogh, or even a Hooper, then techo is a Fark Photoshop thread of nothing but Ackbar cliches.

There is the valid criticism that rap is guilty of the same thing (and, indeed, this pernicious practice has made its way into many genres which used to involve musical, rather than technical skill). I used to discard rap for just this reason. Then I ran across a cover of Gin and Juice by Snoop Dog, done by sa bluegrass band called the Gourds. Some of the lyrics are very clever, and the interlocking rhyme is quite adept. Then there was the Dynamite Hack cover of Boyz in the Hood, which is not as clever, and even less pertainent to my life, but turned out to make a pretty decent song with even half assed music behind it. So I gave some rap some more ear time, and Digital Underground surprised me, Eminem really surprised me (Lose Yourself is one of the very best songs of the last 10 years), and Outkast brought the lyrical style full circle with music behind it that, if it turns out it is sampled, it would be the equivalent of the very best Something Awful or Worth1000 photoshops, and if actually played, something like a Whelan or a Barlowe (to continue with the art metaphor - think sci-fi covers.)

There's also a lot of crap country out there, but there's a lot of crap in any genre, and there really is some excellent country too. Folks talking about Old School country - Johnny Cash, Patsy Cline, Hank Williams - remember, you don't hear the garbage that was out when they were starting and in there prime. It has deservedly faded from public memory. In 20 years, there will be bits of today's country that will get lumped in there too. I couldn't tell you what, though, because it is by no means my first choice of listening fare.

All of which is to say that, while rap shares some flaws with Techno/Trance/House/Dance, I really hate techno, and rap gets, if you will forgive me, a bad rap.

OK,
Don't sell rockabilly short until you've listened to Reverend Horton Heat.

Country. Please don't ever let me square dance.

Are you kidding? All I listen to is rockabilly. And trust me... I've heard the Reverend.

I love to dance to rockabilly.

Ok I can't not let this go by. TECHNO is a seperate genre of electronic music. Why people continue to lump all electronic with "TECHNO" I have no idea. I'm not too fond of trance and I can understand the repetitive beat in all that. Now house is a different animal. House tends to be repetitive unless you listen to progressive house then it is on a progressive scale. It's a much better form of House music. To say that it is all other people's work repeated is simply unreal. The beat may sound the same to an untrained ear but believe me it's different. You can listen to DJ Dan and follow it with say Laurent Garnier (sp?) and you'll notice a huge difference. Guess what..they are still house dj's and producers. Anyway if you're going to hate one form of music at least give it a chance and understand the different aspects of it. I hate rap but love underground hip-hop. There's a big BIG difference. Anyway, if you want to listen to good electronic then drop some good Drum and Bass in the player and jam out.

If we're voting on music, then Rap shouldn't even be on the list.

depends what you understand by a musical skill, doesnt it? if you are talking about the ability to arrange sonic elements in a particular space, then why would manipulation of recordings not be every bit the musical skill as playing a conventional instrument? this shift from consumption of recordings to production is not obvious: it requires a fairly complex remapping of your relation to sound--it is a skill. it is a form of composition--it can be a form of improvisation.

in the group i work with, we use a shortwave radio and some electronic processing boxes as a basic element of our sound. we juxtapose it with piano, which i approach using extended techniques in order to make a space that you cannot simply think about from either angle. there is considerable technique involved with processing the radio, but it does not rely on years of finger exercizes to get to it. at the level of the sonic spaces that get made, the electronics converges with the outer edge of straight instrumental technique, if you let it--it you position it that way--and i think there is a really strong argument for doing it.

the usual way i suggest that folk disabuse themselves of the old school prejudices about what is and is not a "musical skill" is to tell the person making the objection to try it for him or herself. you can make basic sounds with a turntablist set-up quite easily, but it is really not easy to be any good at it. you can manipulate recorded material pretty easily, but it is not at all obvious that what you made by doing it would be interesting. what you have here is a version of the usual objection to conceptual art--i could have done that--to which the only response is--why didnt you?

and if protools or audition give possibilities for organizing sound to people who do not have "proper" musical training, so what? i do not see any argument that would equate this is a bad thing, with a deterioration of "real music" at all--you could argue the opposite in fact--that in some cases, the ways in which sound is organized by folk who come to it acrosss these software platforms is more radically other than anything you would encounter made by folk who come to it through convetional channels,
folk who organize sound across software platforms might open other ways of thinking sound, thinking the spaces within which sound can be placed..that might well transform how players with more convetional techniques work themselves.

further, these platforms undermine the arbitrary distinctions that enable some people to imagine that they hold some kind of monopoly on the production of "legitimate" music. i do not see the problem with that either.

all this is not to say that everything that is produced in these ways is equally interesting, equally important--there is a skill dimension to it. but it seems really limiting to simply exclude entire regions of musical production because you do not recignize the skills that are involved with it.

on another note, tape music has been one of the primariy drivers in the development of contemporary classical music from the late 1940s onward. i could give you a long long list of composers who work in/with the medium--james tenney, xenakis, elaine radigue, morton subotnik, on and on--much of the earlier tape/electronic music is doubly interesting because it was being made before assumptions that electronic music had to imitate convetional instruments was developed.

all this said, i am not particularly a techno fan because of the restricted set of beats that are used in most dance-oriented version of the form. i quite like hip hop when there is a significant role played by the turntablists. drum and bass is a seperate matter--i am something of an idiot fan.

It's unfair to group musical artists the way they are grouped. Most people really making music dont sit around trying to write "country" or "rap" they write music, it's the industry and the silly magazines that give those titles to music. How can you say you hate country unless you've heard every band that has ever been called "country." I think twangy guitars sound just as bad as most, but i wouldnt say i hate country. I like whiskeytown, and i've heard some people refer to johnny cash as country, and i think he's great.

ack country, and by country i in no way mean Johnny Cash because he was the man. I hate country so much

Techno would be like music you hear in a club or something, no words, just music.

Thanks for all the response so far. It seems that rap and country so far have the vote for least favorite music

so you mean most Electronic in general then.. although there is quite a bit of vocal electronic out there. I do have to say that your poll is too broad. There are too many subgenres of music to gain a respectable opinion of the genre as a whole..

I like it all... but just so I can see the results, I'll vote trance.

If there were a "top-40 country" I would choose that, but there are too many great country artists that I love. Of course everything on country radio is complete drech. I had to go with dance/techno because so much of that is totally derivative. There are exceptions for sure: !!!, LeTigre, etc.

Agree on RHH, disagree with the above. Roachboy pretty much already destroyed this sentiment but I just thought I'd add that these are the same things that were said about electric guitars 50 years ago--that they were'nt insturments--that the people who played them weren't musicians etc. People had similiar problems with bass-guitars, synthysizers, drum-machines, theremin, distortion, and samplers--now these things are commonplace.

I dont really mind any of the choices, but out of the list, id have to say country.

whether their commonplace is not the question, its whether it requires talent that were talking about, and none of those do except bass guitar and synth(listen to some synth metal like Children of bodom, Norther or Kalmah, its fuckin talent alright)

and i voted for rap, cause country has some actual musicians, and techno is respectable if it actually involves mad keyboard skills(which it usually doesnt, but there is some)

I'm seeing the Rev on December 11th AND 12th baby! I think that will make it about 14 or 15 RHH concerts in the past 10 years.

Torn between rap and country.

(C)rap!! The funny thing is that Hard Rock/Heavy Metal used to get bagged because the critics said it all sounded the the same. Well hello these same critics acclaim it as brilliant. I can't tell one rap group from a 1000 others plying the same garbage.

so being able to use a set of turntables and a mixer doesn't count? It's harder to blend two songs perfectly together than one thinks...

I could have done a really mean extended version of John Cage's 4'33". I didn't because I didn't want to feel like a pretentious hack.

But I agree with you on the subject of techno.

The problem with that is Electric Guitars, Bass Guitars, and Theremins take every bit the skill to play as any other instrument, so that's a disingenuous argument. Distortion and effects, even midi effects, do not change the fact that one still needs to play an instrument to generate a signal for them to generate, so that's a disingenuous argument. Some synthesizers are really just keyboards, and the best of those mimic the action of a piano to a great degree, requiring the same skills to play, and still others mimic and require the same skills ans other instruments, and one, the Synth-Axe Drumitar the "drummer" for the Flecktones uses, even requires a totally novel set of musical skills, on the other hand, some synthesizers and most drum machines are not musical instruments; they are computers with a sound output, and the skill involved in making music with them is a programming skill. That's fine, but it shouldn't be confused with music any more than a photoshop on Fark or Something Awful should be confused with Art. So, I guess what I am getting at is that synthesizers and drum machines are every bit as problematic as Sampling.

Understand that I am not saying that Synthesizers and Drum Machines and Samples cannot be part of worthwhile music, or something used in addition to things that require musical talent, just that the programmers thereof are more like the lighting guys or the producers or folks who run the soundboard than they are like the musicians. They're technicians, not musicians. My beef with Dance and Techno is that a large part of it seems to me to rely entirely on these programmed devices, to the exclusion of any display of musical talent. That and I find it boring, repetitive, and unpleasant to listen to, so even if you disagree with my intellectual argument for disliking it, you cannot justly disagree that it is very much not to my taste.

You could really have a whole new thread here.

I can't make you like electronic music.. that's a given. I do disagree with you saying that people who make it aren't musical. Even though I don't like him, let's take Moby as an example. He plays the guitar and plays the keyboard among other things. He implements this into his music. That being said he obviously has talent. Now let's take (IMO) the best Drum and Bass producers out there. Pendulum. They used to be part of a punk band. One played drums one played bass. Makes sense huh? They got into D'n'B because of the energy of the music. They obviously have talent as well. Now let's take me. I can't play any instruments but I can spin the fuck out of some records. I dabble in production as well. Creating a song using various programs and synths or whatever you use is quite time consuming and alot harder than people realize. I know people who play instruments and they have a hard time using a redrum kit. So to say that it doesn't take talent is a little insulting from my view point.

Sorry to offend. I am not claiming that it doesn't take talent. What I am saying is that that is not a musical talent on the same order as performing on an instrument, but rather something between that and writing elegant code. It's a talent, but one that does not by itself make music I find compelling or even particularly attractive. (As with everything else, there are exceptions. I heard an interleaving of Oasis - Champagne Supernova and Green Day - Boulevard of Broken dreams put together by a local radio DJ th'other day that was quite clever, but clever only gets so far.)

I understand that it is harder than it looks. I have heard turntable played as a musical instrument - it's percussion - and mixing the percussive scratching with sampling from the records' grooves is quite impressive (if not particularly euphonius to my ear). That's not what I am talking about, not primarily in any case. That's not what I have heard on those selections of house and techno it has been my misfortune to have been obliged to tolerate. Simple 4/4 beats played very very loud, and tape loops, with the occasional snippet of movie dialog thrown in is what I heard. Turn the beat down a bit, throw in a fill once in a while, have some people who play their own instruments react to it and record that (if their reaction isn't to walk out of the studio), and then you have some music that I might be able to respect (or not - playing your own instrument is no guarantee that you play it well.)

So please don't be insulted because I think you're not talented. You may well be talented, but I don't think it's a musical talent. If you want to be insulted about that, well, I am still sorry to have offended, but it doen't change my opinion.

(And I am equally not saying that this technical talent for mix and production precludes musical talent, but, in the case of Moby, I would say it occludes what musical talent he may have. I am not familiar with D'n'B, so I can't competently comment on them.)

techno is hands down the worst music created!

i am still confused as to what woud constitute "musical talent" for you tophat.
you have made a distinction between music and technical abilities: i am not sure where the line would fall. would you explain more directly please?
does "music" have particular tonal features? is it purely technical, done exclusively on traditional instruments?
what kind of music do you play? (your position seems like from someone who plays...)

i think ~1/3 threads in the music forum wind up as arguments about semantics. maybe everyone can agree to something like this:

composition and performance are two seperate, though often connected, elements of music. a composer is necessarily concerned with all 3 facets of music: pitch, rhythm, and timbre (the quality or texture of sound). if any one is missing, a shitty or incomplete piece is the result. for example, if a composer arranged a piece for 20 oboes, he'd be ignoring timbre because lots of oboes = pure pain. rhythm and pitch are more obvious. now take a performer. a traditional instrumentalist (trumpet, piano, guitar, etc) also must be aware of pitch, rhythm, and timbre. overlook any of these and you've got a poor performance. in the gray area of electronic music, i'd argue that it's entirely possible to ignore 1 or more of the 3 musical elements i mentioned. sampling, the only possible musical thing an electronic composer might do is adjust tempos. however, writing an electronic song from scratch can be just as complex as writing for traditional instruments. performance, well thats another story. on turntables, rhythm and timbre (marginally) are the only things going on. pitch is predetermined. i could agree that turntables are a novel percussive instrument, but neither have the full-fledged complexity of a wind, reed, or string instrument. (an array of differently tuned drums excepted from that generalization)

Not shitty. "Avant-grade" :crazy:

Well almost every turntable has pitch adjustment. Pitch matching is one of the basic skills on a turntable. There are also records produced for turntablists which have continuous tracks of various insturments playing one note or chord at a time.

so sorry try again!

p.s. you're also wrong about samplers.

Anything that's has been played on MTV in the past 24-48 hours.

I just can't stomach country music. Old school country was cool (Johnny Cash, Marty Robbins, Hank Williams). But when I am flipping through radio channels and I hear some crap like this:

Well I might go get me a new tattoo
Or take my old Harley for a three day cruise
Might even grow me a Fu Man Chu...
Oh Aww!

it makes me think it's a bi-product of new auditory torture techniques.

oh wow.. I don't even know where to begin to refute this. All turntables have pitch control. It's the most basic and necessary element of mixing. Without it you get crappy mixes and trainwrecks. sampling is a whole different monster. It depends on what you actually mean by this as it has different uses and different terms. If you're doing a mixer sample then yes it isn't difficult. IF you're doing a cut sample with another rec then it becomes an art form. Recs may be meant to be played at a certain rpm but you can speed it up or slow it down for some crazy effects. On the newer turntables you have a reverse feature also. That is not really my thing but it can create some good effects. Anyone who thinks turntables aren't an art form I challenge you to get some good recs and a decent mixer... and see what you can do. While it may be easy to match beats..you'll find it's harder to make it sound good than you think :thumbsup:

my comments weren't meant to offend or disparage mixers. i was merely saying that mixing/sampling in the most basic form doesn't have the same qualities that a traditional instrument has. you can add complexity, but an "instrument" inherently has the complexity.

essentially any object that requires the user to pick and choose the pitch, rhythm, and timbre produced qualifies as an instrument. sampling/mixing can, but doesn't necessarily.

I can stand some rap, but no country at all. So I'm going to have to go with country as being the worst music. I don't see why you listed classical as a choice, it's wonderful =)

Well you're still not providing any substancial difference between a turntable and a "traditional instrument" so...your catagorization would be false.

i thought i was pretty clear, but apparently i've touched a nerve and don't care to look objectively at the situation.

my proposition: a musical instrument has three user-controlled properties - pitch, rhythm, and timbre.

my conclusion: assuming the proposition is true, traditional instruments can all be classified as "musical instruments". some sampling/mixing/scratching can also be considered "musical", but sampling/mixing/scratching present in a fair portion of pop music doesn't have all the above properties. would you consider the random scratching in a limp bizkit song representative of a musical instrument?

Country.... its just bloody crap. All the songs are the same.... utter shite IMHO!!

If you give a two-year old a saxaphone and he throws it down the stairs the sounds it produces may not be music but the saxaphone is still an instrument.

You are pretty much all off of the mark by at least a little. Class on the basics of music will start in a different thread.

This poll appears to of been made by someone who doesn't listen to music.
I voted country.

Second first: I play bass guitar, badly.
First second: There is no sharp line between musical talent and technical skill. There is a fuzzy grey line between them. Perhaps the argument I should be making is not so much between techical and musical as between composition and performance. I don't really know how to go about making that argument: I can't figure how it relates to the debate at had. So that is a given. Now, what's the difference between them: I can only define it by analogy, and I am absolutely certain I display a certain degree of ignorance when I do so (willful ignorance at that - not enjoying the style, I don't know as much about it as I would need to to argue as forcefully about it as I feel it warrants.) It is the difference between composition and montage (still a fuzzy line, but a bit sharper), between creation of a new whole and juxtaposition of exisiting pieces. Ultimately, to me, it is about the complexity of the component pieces and whether or not they are hand crafted in motion to a rhythm or machine turned piece by piece and snapped together at the end to give the illusion of rhythm. A single note on a flute you play on the one hand, a tape loop of 12 bars of drumming someone else did on the other. Play the next note and the next and the next at the right time in the right order on the one hand, repeat every 10 seconds with the pitch falling within the envelope defined by the following equation on the other. Is all techno made that second way? Of course not. Is some? Surely it is. Could I tell the one from the other? Unlikely. Hence, a reason to dislike the lot of it. (For me. Reasonable people will differ. I do feel strongly about it, though, so I find it difficult to kep to a purely intellectual argument.)

Now, turntables. You and guccilvr and locobot have convinced me that turntables have evolved into an instrument. I had been beginning to lean in that direction, but I agree that all the elements, both the complexity and the simplicity, are there that one can play a turntale as more than a pure, improvised percussion instrument. To pull an analogy, though, the LP on the turntable is like the reed on a woodwind. If you have a crappy reed, you will make crappy music. For my purposes, if you have an LP of someone else's work, and you play large, recognizable chunks of it, then, IMNSHO, you have a split reed.

Now, I have said it before and I will say it again: Reasonable people will disagree. At the base of it this is a matter of taste, and taste informs the argument.

Guccilvr - can you throw some suggestions at me of techno that I cannot use these arguments on? Specific songs so I can P2P them and see if I would be interested in exploring further and, perhaps, even revising my opinion. (I have done so with Country and Rap over the years, and it could very well be that I have only heard crappy, insipid techno.) Feel free to PM, and you would have my thanks.

Please explain. It's just a pole of the general music types as if you were to walk into a music store. These are the most common types of music categories you may find with the exception of dance/techno. :confused:

Not a big fan of Rap or Country, but voted for rap.

I voted Rap.

I never understood why a genre that portrays blacks as primitive materialistic sexist pigs could ever become that succesful

"Ungh, Ungh .." anyone ..

I agree with your reed analogy somewhat. IF you play shitty records on a good turntable the music is still going to sound shitty..but this is where personal taste comes into play. A turntable has so many things that you can manipulate other than speed. For instance, the needles. You can have scratch needles or mixing needles and yes they are different and yes they accomplish different things. A mixer is vital to any part of the production. The mixer can do some amazing things.. no matter if it's a battle(scratch) mixer or a true (production) mixer. They both serve a purpose. Of course I'm sure you knew this already :D

I'll be happy to pm you .. it's on the way.

I voted in terms of my opinion on new stuff in the genre, so I voted for country.

Country. I HATE country.

I have become a fan of some rap, not all of it, but some of it. However I would rather listen to someone disemboweling a cat with a rusty spoon than listen to country.

It's a close one between country and rap, but as a musician myself I can respect country more. Defintaley hate rap.

Rap, since it sucks. Country is a close second.

Dance/Techno. I find some rap to be mildly entertaining, like snoop dogg etc. Otherwise I'm more of a country (real country- not country pop stuff) and rock guy.
Classical, I can dig at times.

personally, country never really appealed to me, but some of it isn't that bad. however, I'm open to any music that is well done. my actual least favorite type of music is just the contrived cookie-cutter trash that you hear flooding radiowaves nowadays. I'll gladly take a country song that is from the heart and compelling over a catchy pop punk or teen queen diva song that was cranked out in 15 minutes with the same old hooks and the same old lyrics that will without doubt be a big hit on mtv and sell a bunch of albums just because a lot of people just don't know any better.

I was going to say Classical but I'm not forced to listen to it...but the guys at work like country and keep changing the radio station.....damn country people

I like all sorts of music and have a varied collection of CD's and mp3s....but I listen to rap the least, and I think its either good or horrible, so I chose rap.

Rap/Hip-Hop, can't stand it. If it has "pimps" and such stuff in it I can't stand it at all. The next one would be Salsa. I *hate* salsa.

I absolutely despise happy, touchy-feely kinds of music. Even country sounds better than the usual crap you have to go through if you go out at a club.

Give me something involved, weird, sad, melancholic, dangerous, labile...

And this, although I am in no way what most people would pigeonhole as "goth" or "emo".

Rap, without a doubt. This is sad when you take into consideration that I can at least appreciate all forms of musical expression. But when it comes to Rap. I really, really hate it.

I know just what you mean, although I can enjoy things that sound happy if there is something else going on that makes it otherwise interesting - The Gourds cover of Gin 'n Juice (Mocking rap with bluegrass), Phish - Sparkle (happy or sad, the music itself is interesting), or They Might Be Giants - They'll Need a Crane (Happy, chipper song about a relationship self destucting), Youth Culture Killed My Dog (Just like it sounds), or about half their songs (Happy meets irony).

I'm not sure if I like that about myself, though. Time to listen to more Mozart, I guess.

Yeah, me too... I listened to the song "Institutionalized" by Suicidal Tendencies yesterday and i really LMAOed :-) and enjoyed it, although it's unlike any other bands I listen to.

As far as listening to classical music is concerned, I recognize that classical music is "classier" etc, it might even be more "thought out", but sorry, I can't listen to it. It leaves me completely uninterested. It too grandiose, too pompous, too unrelated to my life, it has no lyrics, it has no message, it can't replace bands like Tool or A Perfect Circle or Anathema, because it just doesn't fulfill my emotion-venting needs :rolleyes:

I had to choose one, so I picked country, but I'd much rather have been able to pick metal. Actually, a lot of techno is pretty shitty too.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you've never actually tried listening to rap. Good for you for being open-minded. :thumbsup:

Well, I could go on and on about how there is as much or more diversity in classical music than there is in all other types of music listed on this thread combined, so that, if you don't like classical music, it is very likely that you just haven't heard the right classical music. That, however, was not the point I wanted to make.

It feels a bit, I don't know, odd? icky? sad? to me that it seems I need cynicism, pathos, or irony to really enjoy a song, and I was merely noting that my listening to something that stood purely on he merits of its sound, like Mozart might be a way to counteract that. (JS Bach would be even better, but what Mozart I have is happier, and Bach, for all his 23 children, is kind of juiceless.) Not that the cynicism, pathos, and irony aren't there in Mozart, just that my ear isn't trained enough to pick them out.

For now I put country, although I do like old school country like Waylon Jennings and Johnny Cash.

My real choice would have been teenie bopper pop music. That, and this new "Pop" Rap stuff that is on the radio nowadays.

Goddamn, I am becoming an old angry bastard already, talkin about the "good ol' days."

I picked rap because opera isn't on the list. I hate opera unless Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd are singing it.

Anything that makes someone think they are better than me because they are more cultured, havent sold out, liked them before they were popular, etc.....

damn music snobs! :rolleyes:

lol, umm realy though its hard to pick one, I can usualy find at least a few songs I like from just about every category. I guess my least favorite would be that super hard death metal crap, it just sounds like noise to me.

fat white kids should not dance...I don't even try anymore

I can't say that there is an entire of genre of music that I don't like. There are songs in every genre I can think of that I like and songs that I don't. As far as these choices are concerned, Techno is what I listen to the least of all of the other categories, but there are plenty of techno songs I enjoy.

ROFL! Are you sure you didn't mean <i>techo</i>?

Its a tie between Country and Punk, both make me vomit equally.

None of the above. Screaming lesbian punk rock drives me up the wall, however. :)

Goddamn Kids today and the NOISE they listen to! Grumble. Where's my fiber?