Thank you, gentleman, for your somewhat straight-faced responses to my tongue-in cheek comments (I was really just having a bit of fun with words); I'll take your observations and recommendations on board. I should perhaps have mentioned that I'm 68, which means my time is limited not merely in terms of the hours in the day. I also suffer from tinnitus, which will further limit the time I have left for the enjoyment of music. Consequently I'll probably stick with my favourites.
As for Eddie Van Halen's virtuoso guitar prowess, it's no doubt a wondrous thing, but as it happens I detest the sound of the electric guitar; to these ears it ranks just below bagpipes. I'm also not a fan of singers of either gender. To me the greatest instrument in the world is the symphony orchestra, and I feel no particular compunction to stray from it into more popular fields. There is, after all, an almost limitless repertoire of recorded works for the symphony orchestra.
I know I'm incorrigible, but there it is. Spank me.
Did you not enjoy popular music as a young man? I'm trying to understand how somebody ends up with such a rigid view. I certainly have things I don't enjoy, but that net I cast very close to the boat fearing a wider swath will catch too much that I might enjoy. I have been close to tears listening to a cello solo played on a instrument crafted in the early 17th century. I have watched Yitzhak Pearlman plow into Bach and been unable to look away, completely mesmerized. I have also watched Billy Talent belt out a tune (Try Honesty) about the sexual abuse suffered by many at the hands of some Catholic priests. A few years back I watched Dave Brubeck perform and the magic was awe inspiring. I can also appreciate well crafted hip hop that is about social issues, not about how big a dudes member is and how he can wrap it in thousand dollars bills. There is so much to hear.
Painting all popular music as frivolous is actually highly inaccurate; in fact, one can make a case that classical musical has it's roots firmly planted in social banality. I wouldn't want that to be completely taken as my view, but it bears scrutiny. Classical and choral music as I understand it was the plaything of the aristocracy who would bathe themselves in opulence and decadence while the masses of people around them did without a great deal. The wealthy benefactors commissioned much of the historic catalogue to elevate and demonstrate their social standing. I have a difficult time picturing the well-to-do graced in unimaginably wonderful attire waltzing while the Black Plague stocked the poor and ignorant (who of course only had access to the rude music that gave birth to what many people today now listen to). You disparage the bagpipe despite the significance it holds to the history and culture for many. That can be viewed as unkind, and it smacks of elitism even if you intended that or not.
Say what you will about popular music, but much of it is real and speaks about things that matter rather than proudly displaying a couth musical pedigree. Perhaps popular music isn't grandly structured around historically hallowed musical practices and perhaps it lacks the scale and power of a full orchestral movement cheered on by mostly well-to-do white people with plenty of disposable income (yes I am white with a modest amount of disposable income so hypocrisy dooly noted). What it often has is a message that connects common people to a shared experience, one that the elite scoffed at as the plight of the rude and dirty. I know that many classical pieces convey emotions and experiences through complex passages and nuanced transitions, and I appreciate that, quite a bit actually, art is art to me. However, much of the historical context of classical music should be reflected upon as the inception was entertainment and social ascension of the powerful.
so it's not really the most "official" limited edition, which makes it probably even more desirable...
