"Rewards repeated listening"

Not many albums need repeated listening. When they do it's because you try to find something good in a album that doesn't have a impact on you or because they have such a impact on you that you need to listen to it over again just for your listening pleasure. If you have to do a review of a album that you don't like, i don't think that repeated listening will help brings more positive things. For me, it doesn't take many listening to make my judgement on a album, a progressive rock album, i mean. But as far as make a review of a classical album, it would take me forever, because the complexity of this kind of music is beyond me. 

The notion that all prog albums need repeated listenings and all albums benefit from this is a perfectly valid opinion.  The key word here being, "opinion".

Personally, after 2 years of listening to an album, I usually don't listen to it anymore (or at least, vary rarely).  I played the 70's Yes albums constantly for two years, now I might pull one of them out once or twice a year, if even that.  Personally, I think that 2 years is about the amount of time it takes for me to get tired of hearing even the most complex and deep albums (assuming I'm listening to them at least once a week).

Also, you can write a review of any album after one listen.  It might not be a good review, but there is no valid reason for someone not to..........other than personal opinions that say otherwise.

For myself, I'm perfectly comfortable with writing a review after 5 or 6 plays......or less, if I feel I can write a good review.  "Rewards repeated listenes" is perfectly valid to use in a review, if the reviewer feels that is the case.  Frankly, not all albums reward repeated listens.  If they do for you, then great.  But I suspect the vast majority of progarchives members will disagree with this notion.  In any genre of music, at least 50% is crap after all (IMO).

moshkito wrote: Hi,   A Physics axiom for many of you ...   "Quality is inversely proportional to Quantity"   It really tells the story about "listening" ... but if some people are too stoned and tripping and have to hear something 147 times ... so be it!

Jethro Tulls A Passion Play really did reward repeated listening i couldn't grasp a hold of the whole thing or concentrate the first few times but i came back to it a couple of weeks ago and gave it my full attention and it was a really great listen and i played it about 4 more times after that over the next few days that was definitely rewarded repeated listening

Some types of music are love at first sight, others needs repeated listings. To me, Gentle Giant belongs to the second group. It needs at least 3 years and many listenings until they belong to my favorites.

moshkito wrote: Tapfret wrote: moshkito wrote: Hi,   A Physics axiom for many of you ...   "Quality is inversely proportional to Quantity"   Hi, Such sweeping generalizations, and particularly the laws of physics are somethings that art transcends.   I hate to tell you this ... you are quite incorrect.   I personally tried this with actors and musicians, and there is a trick to it ... and it is the level of your attention ...check this out ...   If your attention span is 100%, I doubt you will need 50 listens. If your attention span is 10%, you will probably need 500 listens ... to find that little subtle thing that kicks in your listening pleasure ... but by that time I doubt that you will ever listen to it again, because your ability to concentrate is too scattered!   It's the same thing with actors for the stage and learning lines ... 100% concentration, you can learn 50 lines in 20 minutes ... 10% concentration it will take you 4 to 5 hours to get all those lines down ... you decide, which of these is more fruitful for you ... but I can tell you that the difference between a pro and an amateur, usually is their ability to ingest/digest it in one take (so to spaek) ...   Almost all of us reviewers that have been at it for years, do not need to listen to things that many times ... we have way more reference points for most stuff that we listen to, than the music itself has for us. And that is the difference.   It's the same thing for Foreign Art/Film Reviews, of which I have 500 or more and half of that in the Internet Movie Database ... there is no chance of seeing the films a second time, so if your attention is not there, why are you writing a review (first) and (second) what are you doing here?   I am not sure I would want to suggest that "regular" listeners do not have the same ability and are not used to seeing/hearing something different. The only issue I have with the majority of the music listed here, is the same reason I do not review top ten ... 10k people already done it ... what do you need my review for? ... besides, I only do the ones that they are not big enough to try, yet! The ones no one knows or has heard of before, because that is where the majority of gems are these days ... the rest is way too comercial and we need to start dropping most of those reviews, specially when some of the groups are mere mom and pop copies and not progressive at all.

That's why i always think that you can't listen to prog music in your car, in a party or as music background.

moshkito wrote: Tapfret wrote: moshkito wrote: Hi,   A Physics axiom for many of you ...   "Quality is inversely proportional to Quantity"   Hi, Such sweeping generalizations, and particularly the laws of physics are somethings that art transcends.   I hate to tell you this ... you are quite incorrect.   I personally tried this with actors and musicians, and there is a trick to it ... and it is the level of your attention ...check this out ...   If your attention span is 100%, I doubt you will need 50 listens. If your attention span is 10%, you will probably need 500 listens ... to find that little subtle thing that kicks in your listening pleasure ... but by that time I doubt that you will ever listen to it again, because your ability to concentrate is too scattered!   It's the same thing with actors for the stage and learning lines ... 100% concentration, you can learn 50 lines in 20 minutes ... 10% concentration it will take you 4 to 5 hours to get all those lines down ... you decide, which of these is more fruitful for you ... but I can tell you that the difference between a pro and an amateur, usually is their ability to ingest/digest it in one take (so to spaek) ...   Almost all of us reviewers that have been at it for years, do not need to listen to things that many times ... we have way more reference points for most stuff that we listen to, than the music itself has for us. And that is the difference.   It's the same thing for Foreign Art/Film Reviews, of which I have 500 or more and half of that in the Internet Movie Database ... there is no chance of seeing the films a second time, so if your attention is not there, why are you writing a review (first) and (second) what are you doing here?   I am not sure I would want to suggest that "regular" listeners do not have the same ability and are not used to seeing/hearing something different. The only issue I have with the majority of the music listed here, is the same reason I do not review top ten ... 10k people already done it ... what do you need my review for? ... besides, I only do the ones that they are not big enough to try, yet! The ones no one knows or has heard of before, because that is where the majority of gems are these days ... the rest is way too comercial and we need to start dropping most of those reviews, specially when some of the groups are mere mom and pop copies and not progressive at all.

I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention.  All I noticed was that the senseless wall of text didn't address the "physics" axiom.

WalterDigsTunes wrote: I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention.  All I noticed was that the senseless wall of text didn't address the "physics" axiom.

moshkito wrote: WalterDigsTunes wrote: I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention.  All I noticed was that the senseless wall of text didn't address the "physics" axiom.   If you had the intelligence to even attempt reading and stop thinking that the world is all about the sh*t you don't like ... you might find a gem here or there!  But I'm not sure you have the attention span to even try ... since your answers usually have only a few characters and you think your name is Jesus!

If Walter makes you cum that doesn't make him Jesus.
By the way, I think it is a bit harsh the amount of sl*g.ing you've been getting around here for your postings.  You've obviously been listening to prog for a long time and I find it unkind.

Although I do read some and I confess they often makes my brain hurt.



Edited by Slartibartfast - December 03 2010 at 16:22

 /thread