Yup. I'll offer Redbone as another early 70's band with the one monster hit (Come and Get Your Love), but a band with really strong material.

Well, I'm not sure if they fit the "One Hit Wonder" definition, but I'd rate the Boomtown Rats as a band that deserves a lot more attention than they got.

Other than "(Tell me why) I Don't Like Mondays" they didn't have any so-called hits (that I can recall). But the entirety of The Fine Art of Surfacing is filled with gems. In fact, their first three albums are awesome.

I suppose I could add both The Plimsouls and Dramarama to this list as well.

I'd rate either of the first two Nektar albums (Journey or Tab) as both being some clever concepts. Ditto VdGG's H to He

Opinions about execution may differ.

I'll start with the album from which the song came, and if the entire album is strong I'll begin to dive into the discography.

I try to avoid "Greatest Hits" albums because there is too little context, and the deep cuts often give a better sense of the band than just a selection of chart toppers.

So, you ask a question for which there is a clear answer, and you think you've bruised my ego?

Boy, you really are dumber than a box filled with hammers, aren't you.

Look, if you're too stupid to be able to both read and understand what is written, it says more about you than you'll ever realize.

Just to be clear - you being stupid has not offended me, insulted me, or harmed my ego. I just find it very tedious to have to deal with insufferable morons like you. Now please, stop replying to me. You just go away and be your stupid self and leave me alone.

Dude ... are you able to read English? Try going over that first paragraph again ... particularly the last bit.

After that, you may want to re-enroll in 3rd grade.

I see reading and comprehension aren't your strong points ...

Well, if you mean listening as in listening (i.e.paying attention to things like time signature, how the different instruments interact with each other, melody vs rhythm, close-listening to lyrics), then perhaps no more than 2 hours per day -- because this takes dedication.

If you mean listening as in just hearing, then from the time I wake up to the time I am out cold, anywhere from 10 - 14 hours per day.

The first lesson in a research project is to be as unambiguous about your topic, provide a simple question, include a clear definition of terms, list specific things you'd like to measure, and provide some sort of hypothesis (with a null if possible) that you are trying to test.

Otherwise you'll get answers that are often more confusing than helpful, and probably won't get any actual meaningful data. Or even worse, you'll need to "interpret" the data which opens up error and can invalidate your entire project.

Sorry for the lecture, but you should learn this for future endeavors.

I know these aren't very contemporary, but I'd suggest one of the early Shakira songs, like Ciega, Sordomuda or Pies Descalzos

I see what you did there ...

Have an upvote

As you said before, fair enough.

Say hi to Bill, Steve, and the rest of the gang in Bloom County for me!

As I think about it, it seems that my lack of enthusiasm for the Buckley version stems from the fact that to me the song is one from the POV of a middle-aged man who is looking back on his life and his relationships (both physical and spiritual) and trying to unpack the memories good and bad.

With that in mind, a singer still in their 20's - no matter how much soul or passion they bring - miss the mark because one cannot mimic the sort of experience, approach, and attitude that comes with age. It's the same reason that having someone like, say, Bono or Paul McCartney try and cover a song of youthful angst and rebellion comes off as lacking the necessary life-perspective behind it. Sure, they can recall what it was like to be 20, but the feelings and internal reality of a 20 year old are different than the memories of it and an old guy whinging about the difficulties a young person faces can often feel forced or silly. So for this song while a young singer might be able to imagine themselves as an older version of themselves wandering the dusty rooms of their life, it's at best a good approximation.

And, as a middle-aged dude myself, I can sense that inauthenticity (for lack of a better word), while that genuine truth is clear when the song is sung by someone of the right age.

Even worse is using this song as some sort of celebratory anthem. It's not. It may not be full doom and gloom, but there is a melancholy to the lyrics *and* music that sort of renders any use of this as an upbeat joyful song of triumph to be a misapplication.

Anyway, I'm sure that now this comment will be downvoted simply because my opinion doesn't match that of others who are unaware that subjective opinions and interpretations of art is not a matter of right or wrong.

Well, here is where the subjectivity about music comes in, because when I hear them, Cale's version is understated which actually makes the lyrics more impactful, while when I hear Buckley it's almost as if he's trying too hard to give emotional resonance.

However, again, the fact is Cale's reworking of the lyrics was so profound that altering the song that it was a tectonic event. Buckley just sang it differently.

I don't think either of us is wrong, just different interpretations and reactions.

Because Cale was the first to sort of re-jigger the original lyrics and everything subsequently - including Buckley - is just a duplicate.

Cohen's second version (the more secular one) is the absolute best.

A close second is John Cale's version, because all of the others (including Buckley) are just basically carbon copies with nothing original to them whatsoever.

Oh, I've had many orgasmically cosmic-spiritual experiences with music. But for me it seems less about the actual album/band and more about how much yesca I've inhaled before putting on the headphones. Because you gotta use the cans for full immersion.

Go to music-map.com

>This one, at least for me, requires to be at the forefront of my attention

And with that, you've unlocked the door to Captain Beefheart, as well as Thelonius Monk, Zappa, Sun Ra, John Cage, Stravinski, and so many other genuine and truly influential artists of the 20th century.

But the reward for giving your attention to this music far outweighs the effort you put in.

Well, they come with the standard 3.5 jack, along with an adapter for 6.35, so they work perfectly well with phones & mp3 players.

Of course, good phones will also kind of expose the deficiency and limits of mobile devices, so one may hear poor quality sound but the flaw would be in the player/format and not the cans.

Hey, this may sting but then again if the band wasn't gelling then there's not much you can do. In a band personality and fit are pretty important.

I get why you're beaked about this, but you need to just accept it without searching for the 'why' because the answer is never one you want.

It's just like a romantic thing -- if the others aren't feeling it you may not like it but you have to accept it.

Just keep moving forward and you'll be fine.

The absolute best headphones I ever heard are the Sony MDRV6. They're monitors so they present the cleanest, most real sound possible. I think they are now marketed as 7506.

Stay away from Beats, unless all your friend likes is bass, because those (and so, so many others) are engineered to really accentuate bottom without providing the full range.

Otherwise, I second u/DevinBelow and think some grass would be perfect.

Pretty much the only audience I ever have whenever I play guitar or ukulele are my two dogs. Well, maybe the squirrels and birds too if I'm in the backyard during the summer.

The effect isn't very huge. None of them join in (they probably don't know the words), but then again none of them run away either, so I guess I'm not too bad.

Every once in a while I'll get that head tilt from one of my dogs when I try and get a bit gnarly - like he's telling me to settle down a bit. But that's it.