No actually this information only deepens the mystery.

Tool is too slow but AIC isn't? Tool too edgy but SOAD isn't?

Hmmm.

I mean if you give it an honest listen and don't like it, then you don't like it. If you listen and don't think it rocks, people saying words to you isn't going to change anything.

I wouldn't say it makes you stupid, unenlightened or shallow. But, you have forever lost my trust as a source for what rocks and what doesn't.

A lawyer is probably responsible. It's the principal of CYA. When in doubt, it never hurts to cover your ass.

Mason Jennings, "Some Say I'm Not"

Check out GOAT

That's a great one

Not sure about all history, but on the Tool album Lateralus there is two-track piece Parabol and Parabola. Parabol is quiet, atmospheric, and establishes a certain guitar line, then transitions to Parabola with this huge drop that turns the quiet little guitar line into an enormous crushing riff. You can't not crank it.

Dylan has a few. Bringing It All Back Home, Highway 61 Revisited, Blonde on Blonde and Blood on the Tracks.

Billie Jean

I think it depends what you're listening to. There are always enigmatic lyricists out there somewhere. When it comes to pop music though, the lyrics do tend to be more straightforward.

I think there are subjective and objective elements.

Kinda like food. People can say, hey I like the taste of McDonald's hamburgers, and you can't argue with that. But then you compare that to a home-grilled burger with nice fresh toppings, and I think most people would say that is objectively better than a McDonald's burger with one pickle and a squirt of mustard that's been sitting under a heat lamp for eight hours.

So people can like, say, "Baby Shark" as a fun catchy tune. But I can point to objective facts about melody, tone, complexity, thematics, etc. that makes a Mozart concerto better than Baby Shark.

So "what people like" is totally subjective. But "what is good and what is not good" is more objective.

Thievery Corporation