I can understand this -- I wouldn't say I'm necessarily sick of conventional song structures, but I think most of why I've found myself increasingly drawn to jazz and other forms of instrumental music as I've gotten older (in addition to just enjoying the total freedom to feel and experience the music entirely based on my own headspace, without the interference of lyrics, or some intended "message" from the songwriter) is that a lot of the way the music hits me emotionally still feels mysterious to me in ways that are beyond my explanation, even though I know they're not beyond everyone's. I've learned some jazz theory over the years and have found it edifying, but there are still many levels to it that are above my head, and move too fast for me to process in real time while listening. This is a lot different than my experience with a lot of rock, folk, etc., where I feel my brain sort of naturally pieces together what is going on. Which isn't to say I can't enjoy it, only that the experience is different -- as you say, the bar for surprise is higher.tragabigzanda wrote:I'm generally very sick of conventional song structures; it's got to be done VERY well to capture my attention these days.
Which probably adds another layer of complexity to the whole thing. When Eddie was writing songs like "Not For You" and "Immortality," not only was he coming from a place of somewhat (seemingly) rudimentary musical knowledge, but his audience was too -- probably more so! That's a piece that frequently gets omitted from these analyses; we're happy go back and recast EV as a novice songwriter in 1994, but it's rarer that we go back and recast ourselves as novice listeners. And the demystifying definitely happens on both sides of the equation.