How to respond nicely to someone who says Pet Sounds is the most over-rated album in the world?

Imo, most Londoners wouldn't blink an eye if someone said that a record was over or underrated.

 

It's almost like different people have different tastes.

 

I think this is the spot where I disagree -- or at least, where I wouldn't apply the term "great artist", which in my head is reserved for people I genuinely perceive as making a significant contribution on purely artistic grounds (whether or not I like that contribution). But of course, I would have no trouble saying "I'm content to just acknowledge that many people view [that artist] as a great artist, and [that artist] means a great deal to them, all of which I respect."

Laura Nyro is, again, a perfect example for me. I hear everything people appreciate about her work, in that I'm not mystified by their descriptions of what they enjoy or perceive in it. I just categorically do not enjoy it -- but I still respect the craft, the audacity, the distinctiveness, the unstereotyped and original nature of it. And, obviously, I don't think people who like her music are "wrong". I just derive no real pleasure from listening to it, even though I can appreciate elements of it; the experience, considered holistically, does not work for me, and her aesthetic priorities run counter to many of mine.

EDIT: Ah, I see that you added this:

That's easy: I don't. When it comes to aesthetic matters, the only opinion that really matters to me is my own, and that only when I'm making music (in whatever capacity). Whether an opinion is held by one person or a million doesn't particularly shake my stance on whether I think something deserves the "great" appellation.

As a listener, a lot of the time, my opinion only matters to me to the extent that I'm chasing a dopamine hit, i.e. seeking sensuous pleasure. Otherwise, I'm happy to listen to most things, at least in moderation, as I usually learn something -- and at this point that often matters to me more than "liking".

 

I wouldn't say overrated, but perhaps hasn't aged well, compared to say Velvet Underground, Are You Experienced, Abbey Road, etc, but of course, that's just my opinion.

 

I can respect that. I think we do disagree there a bit. When I hear an artist I dislike, it's not that I can't appreciate the vibe of songwriting or skill they may be applying. It's that I run into a point somewhere where I clearly don't get why "x or y" is supposed to be something that I find moving, appealing or skillful. For if I were moved or found it appealing, I wouldn't be puzzled by its appeal, so to speak.

I also believe that only the artist truly knows what they are doing, or meaning. So maybe it's just that I always find it highly presumptious when others claim they "know" what an artist was trying to do, or when they attempt to say they "should have" done x instead of y. I just don't believe in "quarterbacking" artists own art for them after it is already released. They are the one making something new from scratch that is only known to their precise ambition. Not me. I'm the consumer and interpreter and I have free right to interpret. And to take it or leave it.

I do indeed have free right to explain why I'm taking it or leaving it. And I could tell any artist why I like some songs or albums more than others. We all have simple qualities of discernment and taste. It's just that I also understand that there are elements to all artists that are impossible for me to "get" simply by virtue of me not being the creator.

That's also why I have zero issues saying I indeed don't "get" certain artists. It's a thing that I'm not ashamed to say. Which doesn't mean I can't understand the appeal or acknowledge the success, but just that there is a "mystery" that others are finding and I am not hearing it. Or not tuned in enough to understand that the artist is meaning it to be an atrribute yet I'm hearing it as something lacking.

It's very difficult to define why you are not getting something you don't get. That sentence itself shows the bewilderment behind it. It's a bit like trying to prove something where you don't even see the data or facts.

 

There are times when I can point to some technical feature of the music -- a formulaic chord progression, a production choice, the predictability or conventionality of some aspect of the music -- and identify it as the crux of my problem. At other times it's harder to be precise but I can still come up with something: the music of Brahms can sometimes have a lecturing quality that puts me off. Same with Sonny Rollins.

Sometimes, though, I have no idea. People love The Nightfly, and I do love its predecessor Gaucho -- but that solo Fagen record does nothing for me despite several attempts, and I can't really quantify or articulate the reason.

Ah, another edit:

I think "should have done" is presumptuous, but since I am a professional musician of some years (in various capacities), I do feel pretty comfortable saying "This is my problem with this record, and if X were different, I'd like it more".

I don't really relate to music with a consumer's mindset; in much of the music I listen to, I know the people involved, while in other cases I've played the composer's work myself, etc. So that does change things, for me at least, and to me every album -- including my own! -- is a work product that could have been changed in a thousand ways, not a sacred text I view as inviolate.

 

Those are some good points. Like anything, no less music, context or expectation is indeed always a key component.

I'm indeed always coming from a consumer or "music lover" perspective. That is, I don't come to any music or album with a set expectation and I only hope that I will enjoy it and return to it again and again above all other attributes. It's true that I rarely approach music from a foundational or instructor's perspective. All of which are perfectly valid.

I will sometimes break down the music of an artist I love, such as Brian Wilson, and will learn more about why the opening to "California Girls", for example, is so appealing/effective. His use of modulation in songs and the theory that is behind the emotion. There is definitely value in that. It's just that I'm always aware that someone else may see or acknowledge those very same chords, phrasings or notes and not find them as something skillful/creative/tuneful.

 

And yet, I heard it for the first time in the 00s and still I think it's an amazing album! Because it's not only about innovation. It's a soulful album first and foremost! And even though it's not that innovative nowadays it's got its very own sound (well, Brian Wilson mid 60s sound tbh).

To put it in a nutshell, it was an amazing album in its times, and it is still an amazing album but not for the same reasons!

 

But really who cares, we all like different things.

 

Actually, it’s weird that you are even remotely bothered by it. Everybody had their own tastes.

 

Thems fightin words

 

It might be weird, but it's certainly not unusual. In my experience, the majority of people are bothered when someone doesn't share their aesthetic preferences in a field they care about. The person who listens to "whatever's on the radio" may not get bothered if you don't like a song, but they'll flip out if you say this video game or beer or Star Wars movie or surfboard or truck is better than that one, etc.

People who genuinely embrace the value of "different strokes for different folks" across the board -- which includes shrugging off criticism of their own favorites, even harsh criticism -- are actually pretty uncommon. Media and brand preferences are so often a proxy for tribalism, after all, and have been for ages.

 

I’m not a fan of the bands you listed but I love Pet Sounds.

 

Congratulate them on their fine taste.

 

Yeah. I don't associate Pet Sounds with Sunshine Pop. If anything, it's more Baroque Pop.

 

I am 63 and didn’t “get” PS until about 7 years ago. Listened to the stereo version and I was hooked. In my top 5 of all time.

 

tell them "you go to your church, and I will go to mine."

 

I'd probably say, "You're correct, madam! ... Lucky for me, I discovered Pet Sounds before all the hype. By the way, I enjoyed it. Still do. Have a nice one."

 

In answer to your original question, I'd suggest quoting Dylan - "You're right from your side, and I'm right from mine."

I'm afraid I too think Pet Sounds is overrated - I've got it (I asked for it for my birthday one year) and I think there's some good stuff on it. But I wouldn't call it a masterpiece.

 

My answer would be, "sorry, I can't comment as I've never heard it." Discussion over.

 

A related way of framing this is Aaron Copland's old distinction between passive listening and active listening, though he also framed it in a three-tiered system, sensuous/expressive/musical.

(One thing I like about putting it this way is that it gets away from words like "theory" and "instructor", which many people receive badly because they associate them with academia and intellectualism. I think many people want music to reside in a magical place beyond analysis.)

Because of my lifelong background in music-making, for me, almost all of my listening is active listening to some degree -- in that I'm always thinking about questions like How does that work? and What was that sound/chord progression? and What's coming next? This is involuntary, and can be double-edged at times, but on the whole it adds to my appreciation. (Of course "What's coming next?" is part of everyone's listening, at least if they're paying attention. )

There are times when I experience music less actively. But honestly, any time music is playing, there's a part of my brain that parses it (or attempts to parse it) linguistically and structurally -- just as you would if you heard someone speaking. Most of us can't ignore the language in spoken language, so to speak, in that we can't just hear it as meaningless sounds. We listen to the content, form expectations, etc.

I have to go to other art forms, in which I know less about "how the sausage is made", to have a more passive, audience-member experience. I don't know a darned thing about most visual arts or architecture, for instance, so there can be a magical quality to that -- but also a frustrating opaqueness, in that my impressions are all surface-level, without understanding.

 

Ironically, Pet Sounds is the album from the mid 60's that resonates strongly with this generation. Plus, the whole tortured genius tag that Brian has will naturally pull in more people.

 

And even weirder than what you just said because it's not about...
oh never mind, I know what you're up to, lol.
BYE!

 

Why respond at all? Why does that matter? I read negative comments about what I like often and it doesn't phase me a bit because it doesn't nullify nor interfere with my enjoyment of it and there's no motivation nor upside to going out of my way to convince someone otherwise.

 

Did you lift your eyebrow like McGarrett when you typed exactly.