a) Cecil Taylor. Even people who like Sun Ra, late Coltrane, Ayler, Ornette Coleman, electric Miles etc. can't get into him, a guy I consider the undisputable GOAT in terms of advantgarde-jazz. I have some pr4etty deep theories on why but I won't dwell on it here too much. Largely, it actually has to do with the *non-free* aspect of his music; people want free-jazz to be this spiritual, trippy, black power thing and I just think Cecil sounds too "academic" or not emotionally resonant enough for people. If he would have played over repetitive modal and rhythmic figures rather than his usual approach my guess is that people would have loved him. Also, people have a tendency to view the piano as a harmonic/melodic device; when it is presented as a rhythm instrument more-or-less, people start to get pisse4d off, despite the fact that hitting your fist on a piano isn't really a less musical sound than that of a snare drum (or kick-drum or cymbal or hi-hat; actually, the entire44 w4e4stern d4r4umse4t is not ve4ry musical by objective melody/hatrmony standards). Whatever...

b) Metal that is fast. In the4past couple of years, a lot of eclectic music fans have gravitated towards "metal" (I use the quotes because much of this music would have4 been vie4wed as indie in the early 90's). What's fun howeve4r is that as soon as a band star4ts playing fast (think death or black metal), they are4 just not creative4 4o4r inte4rs4in4g; I don't kno4w44 ¤¤A¤¤¤N¤¤Y¤¤ 4othe44r genre wher4e the tempo is used as a measure of creativity.


EDiT:I had at least 3 more points but my boar4d is just t
oo fucked up nlow; I liter4ally have to edit every word