Keen

no

Yes -- especially if those people are really into more than one musical style. The more the keener.

Actually I should rephrase - such people can generally be trusted to know what is good about the style itself, but then may not realise the qualities of individual tracks. The question is really, can you get too close to/possessive of certain musics, and when does that happen, and how can you prevent it?

This qn inspired by the Pop-Eye debate between me and Ambrose on the merits of The Streets. Ambrose knows a lot more than me about garage. He hears The Streets' record as a garage record and judges it wanting accordingly. I hear it as something else which happens to have a garage beat and judge it ace. Now neither of us are capital-R Right but in my opinion Ambrose's knowledge of and love for garage make his instincts here less reliable.

(really sorry to pick on you Ambrose!)

It appears to me that the first target here is prog-rockers, who can't tell arse from jewels in any style of music...
Seriously, one cannot trust fans to give good advice: they'll disdainfully point you towards the obvious as you're a non-fan, or insist that only the purist obscure tracks deserve one's attention (often a lie).

I'll second Brian's notion. Prog rock phreex, of course, might be useless UNLESS they are aware of (and semi-knowledgable) about other types of music outside of the complex splendor of the prog.

Regardless of knowledge, though, I would hope that hardcore fans are aware of their biases, and make them clear when offering advice, and (perhaps) even tailor their advice to whom they're advising. (That might be axing a bit much, tho.)

couldn't the same question be asked about someone who is really into a band not having enough distance to differentiate quality? a fan might be willing to overlook a flaw that is obvious to a newcomer because of previously strong feelings. same goes for a genre i suppose but i don't think there is the same sort of attachment is there? my taste is somewhat narrow but i can still pick out losers from the winners because i can think this is nice but someone else does almost the same much better. oh then i suppose this is your question? an 'expert' would dismiss stuff the general public might find thrilling because he is jaded and already heard everything before? that would be an indication of it being time to move on then. would it not?

They should be the first ports o'call when you want information, but take everything with the proverbial pinch. Same as everything else really.

to be honest, i dont know that much about garage at all. i buy a few 12's, and the occasional Pure FuckinREalSexyStylish Garage VVIII compilation or whatever, thats it. ive never been to a garage night (except in russia) and cant pick up any pirates cos i dont live in london. my comments about the music in 'has it come to this' stem, i think, from the fact that the thing i pick out immediately is the beat, even if its indie stuff. i can picture quite clearly the drumming on a whole host of stereolab stuff or whatever but have no idea what the lyrics are. i pick them up sometimes and even sing along, but even when i do know the lyrics, theres a curious detachment from them, as though they are just other sounds.

what are the ;'qualities' of anything? sorry to get in that subjective/objective thing, but if a track has 'qualities', are they a deeper, quantifiable thing? everyones listening of music is subjective, so how are these 'qualities' defined?

i think that each individual listener has their own set of variables, things that they like, that they define as 'qualities', but that cant be placed in any other context outside the listeners own perception of a tune.

the original question just seems a bit strange. i just cant really accept the idea of something 'good' about a piece of music. even if everyone you know agrees 100% that a certain piece of music is great , that doesnt give it some more abstract value of 'good'. just that lots of people like it.

all it takes is for someone else to negate all the positive things that have been said about the music to render the idea that it is 'good' false.

i see what the point of the question. but it seems to me that it is referring to people who get extremely bogged down in technicalities and minutae of a type of music, that they might miss out on certain aspects of that music, which seems to me to be very likely; but i think the pejorative nature off the question is unfortunate.

and i think that an issue that needs to be addressed is that sometimes people who are obsessively 'into' something, for instance the beat programming, tonal quality of an instrument, recording quality etc, can sometimes help you discover new aspects of that music, and appreciate it in a different way...... this board in fact has done this many a time to me.....

although, generally, i am not to be trusted anyway.

now i dont feel like a hunted animal trapped in a corner, ive read the othe posts. i think dave q is on the money.

Hey, who let ambrose out of the corner?

No, because what the strengths of a particular song are to the enthusiast may be a weakness to the casual listener (and vice versa).

e.g a lot of rap fans would think that MC Hammer was a *wack* MC, but U can't touch this is a great pop record.

If they can't, who can?