u/XipeTotecwithGlitter

Whenever I finish an album for the first time, I often only recall two or so songs. Maybe more if I REALLY vibed with the whole piece (or if it was very short). It's often the first and second song and maybe the last or second-to-last. Potentially also the lead single or whatever else song I heard before going into the album.

And more often than that, I recall all the songs melding together. Like, I know intellectually that Tracks 2, 4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 14 and 15 were different from one another, but in my head they all had basically the same instrumentation, melody, key, etc... even if that is technically untrue. It typically takes a second or third re-listen to familiarize myself with these songs, but unless the tracklist is wildly eclectic (like the White Album or Demon Days) it often runs together for me.

Has anyone else had this experience?

I often wait until those "Top Album of the Year" lists come out to really get into newer stuff. It's been easier than finding stuff on my own, but on top of getting to new stuff super late I've been dissatisfied with not curating my own tastes. Like, how can I expand my own tastes when Im relying on other people's opinions and lists?

Alternatively, how do I make room to listen to EVERYTHING that comes out? Or, rather, how do I find music that Id care about? How do I find those modern deep cuts?

So much music comes out, how do I know which music is worth listening to? Theres listening to stuff that's charting but then how do I sift through the indie stuff or the stuff that's poppy but isn't on Billboard? Word of mouth can do oh so much...

This is a shitty and oversimplistic take and it dilutes the work he puts into his comedy, but whenever I'm like "Oh god, this man is a hilarious genius" I just take a step back and wonder "Am I just biased because he's tall, fit and traditionally handsome"?. Like..of course part of his success is due to his looks. He's a public figure and people pay to watch him perform. You don't get far in the entertainment industry without being conventionally attractive on some level (on top of more practical things like being good to work with, being responsible, being skillful in your art, having good business sense...). It's the Marilyn Monroe/Gentlemen Prefer Blondes quote: "You wouldn't marry a girl just because she's pretty, but my goodness doesn't it help?!". Like, I get this feeling that people give him unearned praise out of pretty privelege and go into hyperbole and exaggeration.

Sorry for asking something so hyperspecific and dumb, but this has been on my mind for awhile.

I remember LONG before Twitter became X (maybe 2018) that some asshole made a post with two pictures. One picture was a grid of albums by male artists and the other was a grid of female albums. The asshole said something along the lines of "Men: artistically significant | Women: look at mah face" and I think said something about how women are inherently vain or whatever.

It was shitty and people in the comments rightfully tore him up about it, but it never left my mind because he had the slightest of points. Just because an artist puts themselves front-and-center on a cover doesn't make it any less artistically-interesting and just cuz they do it doesn't make them vapid. But still, it never left my brain. There has definitely been a discrepancy of how female artists are marketed vs male artists and I think this dickhead touched on something, even though he went about in this sexist, oversimplified way.

If you know what post Im talking about, know where it is or by some miracle have it Bookmarked or screen-grabbed, please send me the link or the screenshot. I'd appreciate it so much!

Sorry for asking something so hyperspecific and dumb, but this has been on my mind for awhile.

I remember LONG before Twitter became X (maybe 2018) that some asshole made a post with two pictures. One picture was a grid of albums by male artists and the other was a grid of female albums. The asshole said something along the lines of "Men: artistically significant | Women: look at mah face" and I think said something about how women are inherently vain or whatever.

It was shitty and people in the comments rightfully tore him up about it, but it never left my mind because he had the slightest of points. Just because an artist puts themselves front-and-center on a cover doesn't make it any less artistically-interesting and just cuz they do it doesn't make them vapid. But still, it never left my brain. There has definitely been a discrepancy of how female artists are marketed vs male artists and I think this dickhead touched on something, even though he went about in this sexist, oversimplified way.

If you know what post Im talking about, know where it is or by some miracle have it Bookmarked or screen-grabbed, please send me the link or the screenshot. I'd appreciate it so much!

Sorry for asking something so hyperspecific and dumb, but this has been on my mind for awhile.

I remember LONG before Twitter became X (maybe 2018) that some asshole made a post with two pictures. One picture was a grid of albums by male artists and the other was a grid of female albums. The asshole said something along the lines of "Men: artistically significant | Women: look at mah face" and I think said something about how women are inherently vain or whatever.

It was shitty and people in the comments rightfully tore him up about it, but it never left my mind because he had the slightest of points. Just because an artist puts themselves front-and-center on a cover doesn't make it any less artistically-interesting and just cuz they do it doesn't make them vapid. But still, it never left my brain. There has definitely been a discrepancy of how female artists are marketed vs male artists and I think this dickhead touched on something, even though he went about in this sexist, oversimplified way.

If you know what post Im talking about, know where it is or by some miracle have it Bookmarked or screen-grabbed, please send me the link or the screenshot. I'd appreciate it so much!