between a 'grower' and something that's genuinely shit but you grow to like through listening to it enough times?
---------
A Case Study:

I was thinking this last night when watching a Promising Local Band.

They're talented musicians. Tight. Can play. Can sing. Look good. But i've seen them twice and can't remember any of their songs. On the local scene people love them and think they're gonna be massively famous but as someone who travels a bit further for gigs I know there are identical bands in every town in the country and have just as much potential whilst being equally mediocre.

So this band play probably a gig a week (name of town). Sometimes two a week but never less than once a fortnight. They play further afield too. So people have seen them many many times and like them. I have no personal attachment to them and think they're a good band but mediocre songwriters. They're a bit like Jet without the cockswinging sexist bollocks. I think people only like them because of how often they see them and because they're a tight, enjoyable band - though not in any way special.

But loads of bands I like I've had to listen to them quite a bit to get into them. They didn't hit me straight away. They struck me as interesting but the music itself only sunk in over time.

So how do I know I'm not just willing myself into liking something? Maybe it's actually just shit and I'm just getting into it by familiarising myself with it.

Like this new Broken Social Scene album. I liked the last one after a few listens. i've heard this new one a couple of times and it's still at the 'interesting' stage. I know i'll grow to like it.

But...

I sometimes think I should just stick to music that grabs me straight away. But then then only stuff i'd have listened to this year would be Arcade Fire, Jamie Lidell and Neutral Milk Hotel. Even Patrick Wolf took a spin or two for me to love it.

What's a chap to do?

</waffle>