The REAL Hipster bands are the ones the poster misspells, amirite?

February 1, 2013 12:05 AM

Coachella Hipster Cred Calculator "Pick out the bands you like and add them up to figure out your hipster cred". (Points determined purely by how far down the daily billing list they are and how large/small type the band name is (with one exception: somebody must really hate the Red Hot Chili Peppers - not that there's anything wrong with that)
posted by oneswellfoop (86 comments total)

My own net hipster rating: +1 "Entry Level Hipster", solely because I do kinda like The Wombats (my only +3 band - everything else was between +1 and -1)... I'm still kinda surprised Sparks was way down on the +1 level... the Mael Brothers have been solidly quirky for over 40 years and who doesn't LOVE "This Town Ain't Big Enough for the Both of Us" or "I Predict"? (Although I was disappointed when Ron changed from the Hitler mustache to a John Waters style, but I digress) Still, I'm a 57-year-old Entry Level Hipster... I need to change my style of glasses.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:08 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

You get more hipster cred for liking Paul Oakenfold than Jurassic 5? This calculator is broken.
posted by fshgrl at 12:14 AM on February 1 [16 favorites]

I am frankly puzzled by some of the artists on the mildly positive side of the hipster calculation. Dropkick Murphys? Janelle Monae?
posted by cobaltnine at 12:16 AM on February 1 [4 favorites]

Why would anybody want to use "hipsters" as a point of reference in 2013? If anybody can come up with a serious answer other than "laziness" I'd really like to hear it.
posted by benito.strauss at 12:21 AM on February 1 [4 favorites]

So I can make up for liking the Red Hot Chili Peppers by also liking Lee Scratch Perry, Jello Biafra, The Wombats, Spiritualized, The Violent Femmes and Infected Mushroom?

Sounds fair.
posted by Jimbob at 12:21 AM on February 1 [2 favorites]

Why would anybody want to use "hipsters" as a point of reference in 2013?

Clearly you stopped using the word "hipster" before it was cool to stop using the word "hipster".
posted by Jimbob at 12:22 AM on February 1 [22 favorites]

Now I'm just depressed at all the absolutely amazing bands playing this year. This happens to me every year, and no amount of telling myself how much I abhor festivals will fix it. Being in a large city located roughly at the country's halfway point helps, as we get a surprising amount of runoff shows every year - for example, this year I have tickets to see Nick Cave, who for some reason scores crappy on this weird scale both with the Bad Seeds and Grinderman.
posted by item at 12:25 AM on February 1 [2 favorites]

How many points do you get if you personally met the acts? Is that minus or positive?
posted by empath at 12:31 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

I get +14 points for liking bands, and another bunch of points for hating the fuck out of Coachella.
posted by aubilenon at 12:38 AM on February 1 [3 favorites]

Coachella? Trick question. What's next, Lollapalooza and Lilith Fair calculators?

/sneer

/irony

/or-*is*-it? ;) {|}
posted by weston at 12:41 AM on February 1 [2 favorites]

I tried adding the bands I think should be at Coachella next year and I'm worried I broke math.

(Man, there's a lot of familiar local Seattle hipster bands on that lineup.)
posted by loquacious at 12:43 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

I have to calculate this by hand? Talk about typical hipster fetishism.
posted by Lorin at 12:44 AM on February 1 [5 favorites]

Shouldn't 'NEUTRAL' be the best score you can get on a hipster scale?
posted by mannequito at 12:44 AM on February 1 [9 favorites]

I so used this page before it became mainstream.
posted by Samizdata at 12:45 AM on February 1

Both Nick Cave bands, Japandroids, Social D, Gaslight Anthem and Descendents got me a -1.

Those are the only good bands on the list, and except for Japandroids I've already seen them. If anyone has a free ticket to Laneway Festival I'll see Japandroids this weekend, but I don't want to pay $100 to see a bunch of bloodless indie bands with them.
posted by Charlemagne In Sweatpants at 1:01 AM on February 1

needs to be a sliding scale for each band that awards you hipster points based on how quickly you stopped enjoying their music
posted by Solon and Thanks at 2:25 AM on February 1 [5 favorites]

Nicky's sucked since the Boys Next Door broke up.
posted by Charlemagne In Sweatpants at 2:27 AM on February 1

I can't find a single act on the list that you'd classify as (truly) experimental, or noise, or drone, or unclassifiably weird, or anything that falls outside of a clearly delineated indie/pop/dance/rock spectrum. It's very much a sort of "indie is the new mainstream" selection of bands. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just what draws people to festivals in 2013. But I feel like a hipster who is mainly into underground stuff that tends to fall below Pitchfork's radar wouldn't score more than, like, Confirmed Hipster on the list; and I'm curious about anyone who gets the Pure Hipster Filth Scum prize, because they seem to be a weird mix of people who ONLY listen to shitty third-rate EDM acts no one even bothers to write up that serve as mere fillers at DJ tents to keep the kids on molly dancing...
posted by naju at 2:36 AM on February 1 [3 favorites]

experimental, or noise, or drone, or unclassifiably weird

Why would 100 thousand people pay $300 to see experimental and unclassifiably weird music? That has never happened in the history of the world. Also, Sigur Ros hits all those, but they're popular, so I guess they don't count.
posted by empath at 2:44 AM on February 1 [5 favorites]

Modern pop is experimental, unclassifiable, eclectic and weird. Even something popular like The xx.
posted by Charlemagne In Sweatpants at 2:52 AM on February 1

Well, that to. I guess I was imagining something more experimental, unclassifiable and weird than stuff like Sigur Ros and not really seeing a mass audience for it. A lot of those acts are weird enough as it is.
posted by empath at 3:00 AM on February 1

Why would 100 thousand people pay $300 to see experimental and unclassifiably weird music? That has never happened in the history of the world.

Uh, I'm not arguing otherwise. Although I can think of a few national festivals where the bill is as experimental and un-pop as you can get (No Fun Fest, Neon Marshmallow, etc.). I just feel like we can't even begin to talk about obnoxious hipster music tastes until you get into that scene of, uh, homeless-looking beardos rolling around the floor naked in christmas lights while playing a custom-designed buchla 200e modular, screaming into a modified contact-mic'ed dildo kind of stuff. I'm joking but you get the idea.
posted by naju at 3:01 AM on February 1 [5 favorites]

I'm so hip I haven't even heard of most of these bands.
(Although the idea of getting hipster cred for liking the Violent Femmes in 2013 is kind of weird.)
posted by Daily Alice at 3:15 AM on February 1 [5 favorites]

Wait, hold the phone. You're burying the lead here.

SPARKS IS PLAYING COACHELLA?

That would almost be reason enough to go.
posted by pxe2000 at 3:22 AM on February 1 [6 favorites]

Neutral. My hipster cred is the same as my alignment.
posted by betweenthebars at 3:50 AM on February 1

That should really be 'Neutral Milk Hotel'
posted by Charlemagne In Sweatpants at 4:04 AM on February 1 [4 favorites]

Oh please. I'm one of the least "hip" or "with it" people in this universe and even I know that you're not supposed to like Grimes anymore.
posted by pugh at 4:17 AM on February 1 [2 favorites]

I can't tell if it makes me more hipster or less to not even recognize most of the negative bands.
posted by DU at 4:26 AM on February 1

Poster: "Hey man, your favorite band? Yeah, they suck."

Me: "Fuck you clown."
posted by From Bklyn at 4:37 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

You have to admit that whoever put together that Coachella flier is like the King of All Trolls. Just looking at that list, I see several magnitudes of weirdness in billing order. That had to be intentional to get old farts like me to rail about it online, thus increasing exposure.
posted by robocop is bleeding at 4:57 AM on February 1 [6 favorites]

Goddamnit, Sparks AND Cafe Tacvba? I am on the wrong coast, is what.
posted by pxe2000 at 5:01 AM on February 1

Tip - if you list Jamie xx as well as the xx you end up with a net +2

And why are Passion Pit, Purity Ring and Youth Lagoon in totally different categories? to me, and to my playlists, they're kin.

This looks like a good fest, anyway.
posted by Flashman at 5:21 AM on February 1

What's important is that we can all feel smugly superior.
posted by Stagger Lee at 5:30 AM on February 1

There was a great article a while ago about contemporary music festivals, which basically pointed out that they are no longer the places where people go to find out about music, or to experience music they like. Instead, they are another point of mass consumerism for brahs who are uninterested in the fine granulations of cultural movements. Places to get shitfaced, in other words - like a sports event but with more tents.
posted by The River Ivel at 5:48 AM on February 1 [2 favorites]

+1 for Dropkick Murphys, -1 for Social Distortion. Other than those two, there were only a handful of names I ever heard of, not that there was any chance I'd have hipster cred.
posted by tommasz at 5:54 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

Although I can think of a few national festivals where the bill is as experimental and un-pop as you can get (No Fun Fest, Neon Marshmallow, etc.)

Calling No Fun Fest and Neon Marshmallow "national festivals" seems like a huge stretch. They attract crowds in the hundreds, right? I mean, I guess I'd think twice before calling say Austin Psych Fest or the ATP events "national festivals" and they attract crowds in the thousands (with a good amount of experimental, un-pop music). Coachella is on a whole different level, attracting ~75,000 people per weekend.

I think they've had more out there stuff in the past but it has tended toward reunions/rare (say, Throbbing Gristle) rather than the current and cutting edge. The market has also changed; fifteen years ago there wasn't a Bonnaroo, Sasquatch or Lollapalooza to compete with. There weren't near as many of these smaller destination festivals either.
posted by mountmccabe at 6:05 AM on February 1

[Charlemagne In Sweatpants, please cut out the "if you like X band you should be banned from listening to music" type dumb comments. This is not meant to be all about you; participate like an adult.]
posted by taz at 6:06 AM on February 1 [2 favorites]

It's very much a sort of "indie is the new mainstream" selection of bands

Every Coachella ever.

Total score: -1
posted by _paegan_ at 6:09 AM on February 1

Can I claim a +1 if I think I've actually heard a track from one of the bands. (Actually recognized two, that at least makes me cool, no? ; -)
posted by sammyo at 6:15 AM on February 1

Neeevermind, after going back and scanning the comments, Dropkick Murphys hipsterness is contested.
posted by sammyo at 6:18 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

This is rubbish. I got "listens to the radio".
Ladies and gents, I have not listened to music radio in a decade or more.

Also, Dead Can Dance kinda stand out. Dibs on the moshpit.
Also, Mord Fustang?
posted by Mezentian at 6:20 AM on February 1

Actually, I am seriously offended that anyone would suggest I listen to the radio.
posted by Mezentian at 6:22 AM on February 1 [3 favorites]

I will be arranging my tastes to perfectly balance each other out. Lee Scratch Perry's good by me, so I can keep liking the Stone Roses. Four Tet will allow me to keep Sigur Ros around. Still working on a way to save the Chili Peppers.

Also, Social Distortion is mainstream now? I have not been paying attention.
posted by echo target at 6:23 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

Maybe this list is based on T-shirt sales, or some other non-music factor?

Nicky's sucked since the Boys Next Door broke up.

Sir, I find your taste in music questionable. To dismiss The Birthday Party with a wave on your hand is unconscionable.
Further, I would point out that Boys Next Door never broke up. They morphed into The Birthday Party. It was as The Birthday Party that they broke up during the Cave/Howard Wars. Dark, dark days. The beer bottles flew thick and fast in those days.

(And even then they largely carried on as The Bad Seeds, who, in my personal opinion, were fine and dandy until Murder Ballads).

You have the uncouth taste of a Yalie. Good day, sir.
posted by Mezentian at 6:29 AM on February 1 [2 favorites]

You have to admit that whoever put together that Coachella flier is like the King of All Trolls. Just looking at that list, I see several magnitudes of weirdness in billing order.

It was put together by a team of people* and I really can't take issue with it. I mean, if I were to rank them by my taste** or by importance or something it would look very different but I really can't see anyone that I'd consider two or more lines off where I'd put them, for the Coachella crowd/target audience.

What names stand out to you as out of place?

I mean, I might switch Yeah Yeah Yeahs and The Stone Roses. I'd have thought Aesop Rock and Four Tet would be a line higher but I can't think of who I'd push down. Maybe I'd switch The Make-Up and 2 Chainz, maybe TNGHT and El-P should be higher? But these are quibbles. Maybe the kid that's a son of a Beatle should be higher based on (last)name recognition alone but that isn't how such things have worked in the past.



* This is clear from looking at the series of fake posters that come out each year in advance of the lineup; showcasing their lack of knowledge of one genre or another and filling the poster with known bands (well, on this level at least).

** I have friends who do this, photoshopping the poster to reflect how much they want to see the bands.
posted by mountmccabe at 6:29 AM on February 1

I have no interest in hipster cred. I could use some of that hipster cash though..
posted by srboisvert at 6:34 AM on February 1

cred fix: http://schedule.sxsw.com/2013/events/event_MS21416
posted by xjudson at 6:35 AM on February 1

Ignoring the Peps hate vaults me into Confirmed Hipster territory. Who knew?
posted by gimonca at 6:38 AM on February 1

Even when I was young I would shudder at the thought of going to Coachella. It reminds me of that Jim Gaffigan rant about camping. You wanna know who is the real "happy camper"? The guy leaving the camp site. I guess I just prefer not to share my live music with thousands of other assholes.
posted by Brocktoon at 6:45 AM on February 1

Bob Boilen wrote a post recently about how taste used to pander more to exclusivity while nodding to my generation's mostly all-encompassing palate. I can only kind of speak for myself but it feels like we've grown out of even the 90s hate of bands with really narrow demographics, such as the ones aimed at tweens, bros, rednecks, and black people, into being able to to include them into the kitsch by way of covers and remixes and finally pure enjoyment. It feels like this whole 'hipster' thing is the dying ebb of the baby boomer motif. On one side is the exclusivity with a metric of popularity, the other is exclusivity with a metric in niche. In the midst of it all, who really cares that much except for issues with record label lobbyists and copyright law. Why can't you just want to listen to music that you like without it becoming an identity thing?
posted by dubusadus at 6:47 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

I do, in fact, listen to the radio.
posted by fiercecupcake at 6:47 AM on February 1

*old guy on couch listening to Thelonious Monk wanders into the wrong thread*
posted by kozad at 6:55 AM on February 1 [2 favorites]

If I pretend to not like the Chili Peppers, this old guy could score a big 6!
posted by booth at 6:58 AM on February 1

Also the poster they used for this is the initial version. It has since been changed a number of times though the only scoring difference is that Metric has moved from 0 to +1. If anyone is interested this should always go to the current poster.

Also anyone interested in listening to these bands might want to check out my friend's Spotify playlists for Friday, Saturday and Sunday.


Also this is probably clear but I am a Coachella geek, scored a +17 (mostly from Sunday) on this silly calculator and am actually not going this year but am annoyed they finally got Nick Cave (twice!), the Stone Roses, etc.
posted by mountmccabe at 7:00 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

I'm -4 because I kind of like Social Distortion, New Order, the Postal Service, and Jurassic 5 (I don't know if really liking the song Raw Sugar makes me a Metric fan, but I don't think so). La Roux is a 0, but if I were to go to Coachella (which I would not, because ticket prices are absurd and I have no desire to go any deeper into Riverside County), it'd be solely for La Roux. The girl from La Roux is adorable.
posted by Redfield at 7:08 AM on February 1

Cute. But +1 for Violent Femmes and Dropkick Murphys? Lazy ...
posted by crazy_yeti at 7:13 AM on February 1 [2 favorites]

OK, who wants to put money on New Order appearing with a holographic Ian Curtis?


That's pretty much the only thing I would go to Coachella to see.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 7:14 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

The Make-Up are back together? That would probably be a fun show to see.
posted by burnmp3s at 7:17 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

Who listens to the radio?
Straight outta '78 y'all.
posted by Mezentian at 7:27 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

What's the difference between Harriet Tubman and The Red Hot Chili Peppers?

Harriet Tubman, as we all know, was a heroine to the slaves, whereas the Chili Peppers are slaves to heroin.
posted by porn in the woods at 8:05 AM on February 1 [9 favorites]

So...going to Coachella is about credibility, or something?
posted by Doleful Creature at 8:34 AM on February 1

I've been to the Empire Polo Club....for the Big 4 show in 2011. I think that puts me in the "fractured pelvis" range of hipness.
posted by bgrebs at 9:16 AM on February 1

The Wombats are fun. I like The Wombats. Also, I do listen to the radio. But only the classical station, and only for the opera. Take that, hipsters?
posted by Gin and Comics at 9:28 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

Since bands marked zero don't affect the score, presumably they're only there to head off protestations of "this list sucks, where is band X?"
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:40 AM on February 1

It seems like maybe people are missing the point. That's the actual Coachella poster. Nobody ranked the bands in order of hipster cred. They're ranked in the order (i.e. font size) that the Coachella promoters decided would be most effective in drawing an audience to the festival, not in order of what anyone things is more or less "hipstery" or mainstream or whatever. The point is to mock the poster, not to suggest that the smaller-typeface bands are, in fact, more or less cool, mainstream, hipstery, or whatever than the other bands. Sheesh.
posted by The World Famous at 10:16 AM on February 1 [3 favorites]

Actually I take it that the (thin) joke of this calculator is that the bands are already ranked by hipster cred. That liking the big font, more recognizable, more popular bands gives you less cred than liking the small font unknowns.

It's mildly amusing but that's it. It's not even executed well. We have to add it up ourselves? We don't have to decide if we like them or not before we see where they are on the poster?
posted by mountmccabe at 10:36 AM on February 1

I know this thing is supposed to make me all 'grar' but mostly I'm just happy to see Sigur Rós is considered an h2-level festival draw. Awesome music for everyone!
posted by zjacreman at 10:51 AM on February 1

-13 (yay Janelle Monae actually earned me a point), wow, but I'm so unhip I don't even know why we don't like hipsters. I just never encounter them at all as my musical tastes probably make obvious. I came to love Phoenix after hearing their song on a cruise ship. I do listen to the radio. Why am I even ON Metafilter??
posted by Danila at 10:51 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

1. Band names suck. Five decades of relentless combinations of semi-English word combinations has ruined it for everyone.

2. Making the RHCP (highs, lows and in-betweens) somehow equal to 5 or 10 forgettable bands is just wrong. Even if you don't like them, they are an important part of rock canon.
posted by clvrmnky at 11:15 AM on February 1

0! I feel pretty delightfully neutrally hip for an old lady.

Also, if there were still tickets left (I just checked) I would be really tempted to fly out for that second day lineup. Postal Service, New Order, Franz Ferdinand, Knife Party, and Benny Benassi? Dang, man. Dang.
posted by jess at 11:20 AM on February 1

1. Band names suck. Five decades of relentless combinations of semi-English word combinations has ruined it for everyone.

Band names do suck, and it is frustrating that the number of available never-before-used names must, by definition, grow smaller and smaller. Nevertheless, it's not like there has ever been a time when band names were generally good or better than they are now. Band names have always sucked. The Beatles? Really? I mean, I get the pun - "the bug with the beat" - but it's a stupid name. Led Zeppelin? Awful name. The Yardbirds? The Beach Boys? These are stupid names for great bands. I'll grant you that The Who is a fantastic name, as are The Stooges, The Kinks, The Rolling Stones, L7, and plenty of others. But in every era there have been a few good band names and lots and lots of terrible ones.
posted by The World Famous at 11:29 AM on February 1 [1 favorite]

What's the worst thing that Anthony Kiedis can give a woman after a one-night stand?

A copy of his latest LP.
posted by porn in the woods at 11:30 AM on February 1 [3 favorites]

That's the actual Coachella poster.

See I didn't realize this becuase the poster just looks too terrible, like The Oatmeal style terrible that I was sure it was part of the joke.

Seriously what a crappy poster.
posted by Doleful Creature at 12:18 PM on February 1 [1 favorite]

And here's the original, for reference.

Maybe it looks better in print??
posted by Doleful Creature at 12:23 PM on February 1

The bands I like are on there, but the font is so tiny you need a wall-sized reproduction to see them. You probably haven't heard of them.
posted by George_Spiggott at 12:27 PM on February 1

The Three O'Clock?!?111
posted by jetsetsc at 12:40 PM on February 1

The Three O'Clock?!?111

The desert out by Coachella is one of the few places it's safe to fly jet fighters.
posted by benito.strauss at 12:43 PM on February 1

It's always perplexing to me when I see this idea perpetuated, that people enjoy obscure bands as a put-on to build up an impenetrable wall of coolness. The friends who I have who seem to have the most obscuro tastes are typically those who are the most enthusiastic about sounds, and whose appreciation of music brims over into all kinds of bizarre cracks and fissures because it's just too vast to be contained by radio's single vessel. I love a lot of lesser-known bands and styles and at most I find it mildly frustrating that I don't run into more people that I can discuss them with. I like to talk and think about music, so in a way it's slightly disadvantageous that my passions aren't incited by Drake or MGMT, because it would be a lot easier to find people at parties to beak off about tunes with then.

Why is this meme so persistent? Is my experience really that uncharacteristic -- are there actually that many people out there who use the obscurity of their tastes as a bludgeon? I can think of exactly one I've ever met, over a decade plus of working as a musician and hanging out with musicians: he was into Grateful Dead side-projects, and everyone in the room rolled their eyes at every "well, YOU would know him as Phil Lesh".

Really, every time I see this kind of thing it just looks like unresolved first-world high school neurosis writ large. It's very unbecoming!
(that, or maybe it's always written by musos making fun of themselves and I don't get the joke)
posted by metaman livingblog at 1:57 PM on February 1 [1 favorite]

My best mate not only listens to bands very few people have heard of but he always likes their first demo or EP as opposed to a song that a few thousand people have listened to. He also dresses like a hipster stereotype.
posted by Charlemagne In Sweatpants at 3:04 PM on February 1

I just feel like we can't even begin to talk about obnoxious hipster music tastes until you get into that scene of, uh, homeless-looking beardos rolling around the floor naked in christmas lights while playing a custom-designed buchla 200e modular, screaming into a modified contact-mic'ed dildo kind of stuff.

I saw Black Flag in the mid 80’s Rollins days too! Too many times.
posted by bongo_x at 4:50 PM on February 1 [4 favorites]

Not a lot of uptempo metal just generally. Although perhaps raw naked passion is antithetical to the ethos there.

with one exception: somebody must really hate the Red Hot Chili Peppers
Someone in Los Angeles really hates the fucking Eagles, man.
posted by Smedleyman at 5:52 PM on February 1

Well, someone taking an uncharitable reading of your own post could end up with the profile of a hipster strawman:

I am "the most enthusiastic about sounds", and my "appreciation of music brims over into all kinds of bizarre cracks and fissures because it's just too vast [my emphasis] to be contained by radio". I find it "frustrating that I don't run into more people that I can discuss [obscure bands] with", and in a way it's unfortunate that "my passions aren't incited by Drake or MGMT, because it would be a lot easier to [talk to common people]".

I know you didn't mean it this way, but it's easy to see how someone slightly insecure about their tastes could see what you've said as an attempt to assert superiority over them through your more sophisticated music preferences. And, if we're being completely honest with ourselves, isn't there maybe a kernel of truth in that perception? I mean, I'll change my order in a restaurant if someone before me orders what I was going to order, so as to avoid being seen as unoriginal, so I know I'm at least somewhat guilty of this.
posted by Pyry at 6:02 PM on February 1

Entry level hipster, apparently, and I cannot believe I got a hipster cred point for liking OMD.
posted by immlass at 10:33 AM on February 2

I think you lose all hipster cred if you think going to Coachella gains you hipster cred.
posted by scelerat at 11:17 AM on February 2 [1 favorite]

Entry level hipster, apparently, and I cannot believe I got a hipster cred point for liking OMD.

I was a bit confused by that too. And then I decided they must mean liking them ironically.
And then I discovered they have a new album coming out with a Kraftwerk connection in there.
posted by Mezentian at 5:27 PM on February 2

Pyry: I guess what I think is the question begged is the assumption that people who enjoy "obscure" music necessarily think less of people who do not - e.g., that one of the purposes of listening to obscure groups is to "assert superiority". I feel music nerdery, at least as I've seen it play out in my immediate circles, is like birdwatching; if one birdwatcher happens to run into another at a random, non-birdwatching-based event that's cool and they'll probably be excited to talk shop for a bit, but if their conversation partner turns out to be someone who isn't that's fine too, since most people statistically aren't going to be birdwatchers and any birdwatcher who's socially keyed in will realize that. It doesn't mean anything about the other person, except that they don't share a certain niche hobby. It's of course a little different with music since it's often presented as a lifestyle product, but really I feel it's a lot better and more rewarding if it isn't consumed that way.
posted by metaman livingblog at 1:55 AM on February 3