Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo
(Post 499080)
Some things that are accessible to me are not accessible to others, and some stuff thats considered accessible to others is not at all accessible to me.
|
Your post is very much imo an implicit anti-indie/alt rant but we've had enough arguments about that already. I think you sum up the crux of the matter in that quote over there. Accessibility at the end of the day is REALLY relative. For example, I personally don't find Mariah Carey particularly accessible, whereas she's like the best selling artist ever or something?!
I think "accessible" is merely a synonym for "listenable". So if something is of the sort of thing that one enjoys listening to, then for that person it is accessible. Sigh. This sounds like stating the bleedin' obvious and I feel stupid writing it. I think I can probably take it a step further, though.
Perhaps "accessibility" could be defined in terms of what the general populace find accessible. That would allow it to be slightly more restricted in what it may encompass. In that case, the most of us on these boards, the proggies of us, the metalheads of us, the indie-kids of us, the hardcore rap fans, whatever, the lot of us listen to very inaccessible music - and
that is the dividing line between casual music
listeners and very serious well-researched diehard niche music
fans. We're not chart wh
ores. We look for something more out of what we listen to. So we're automatically listening, all the time, to music that is plainly inaccessible to the rest of the population. Hell, even the slightly more mainstream indie stuff like TV On The Radio for example is absolutely unbearable to your average listener, even a person who might've been a big fan of music throughout the 60s/70s (like my dad).
I remember when I first started listening to "niche" music: the band was Tool. At the time, I thought it was the sort of thing that few people would be able to listen to. From the perspective of considering a lot of the stuff I listen to presently, Tool is pretty accessible by comparison. I suppose it really depends what the music is, and what it is being compared to. I mean, boo boo can't listen to Deerhoof at all. To me, Deerhoof is some of the most listenable indie I've come across. I think something like Deerhoof is an awful lot more listenable than the likes of Neu or Can (both of whom I also like).
On the topic of pop, I'd like to address this too. Pop has a number of different meanings and uses. It could, on the one hand, simply be an umbrella term for anything that'd fall under "easy listening". This is the most common meaning for the word. Then, there is the broader meaning of "pop". In this latter meaning, pop refers more to an aesthetic. It means that the music gravitates towards melody, hooks, and bright arrangements, or at least one of those three things. Barring any of that, it would be weird to refer to music as "pop". I agree that Psychocandy isn't really all that poppy at all and am not sure why the band were labeled noise pop as opposed to noise
rock.