Burnwinter wrote:
Rex wrote:
That Tame Impala song doesn't do anything for me. Not really my kind of music, don't like the voice, and the rhythm of the singing is too repetitive.
Qwiss! wrote:
A lot of that stuff about these days, I'm not a fan either. Its all a bit limp.
You guys have 90s sensibilities. I can dig it but we older gents do need to adapt a bit. However, with Tame Impala, to me there's so much good psych-influenced stuff around (and just as much bad stuff) you can afford to be picky.
i grew up in the 90s and hold a lot of that music near and dear to my heart. pearl jam, oasis, smashing pumpkins, green day, stone temple pilots, soundgarden, you name it. but beyond that, i went through huge classic rock phases, an 80s phase, a hip hop phase, a classical music phase, and a huge prolonged jazz phase, then an electronic music phase. ive taken in a lot of music over the last 20+ years. ive kind of learned, from my own listening methods, that i need to take each album as it is, and understand that sometimes i need to listen to something multiple times before it "clicks" and sometimes it never clicks. music is pretty much the most subjective thing there is. different people love different things.
the first time i heard lemon jelly's music, for instance, i instantly loved it. it hit me really deeply, probably because of the mood i was in at the time and the part of my life i was experiencing. on the other hand, when i first listened to the clash, it didn't really do anything for me. i re-visited their music a few years later, when i was in a different place in life, and it made a lot more sense to me, and struck a deeper chord.
the tame impala record resonated right away. i understand the lyrics and the emotions they convey, and the music is brilliantly engineered and produced. i liked lonerism a lot, but it took a few listens for me to really embrace it. this one i embraced 10 minutes into my first listen.
