The other day I gave a listen to Frankie Cosmos' album "Next Thing." I was awestruck at her way of communicating the floating thoughts of a strict observant who frequents coffee shops, inserts existential quips and dies for enjambment. Her voice spoke to me like I speak to myself, in the marooned room at the end of the hallway in my mind. Then Death Grips leaked onto the Internet with another sonically schizophrenic output in "Bottomless Pit." All I had been listening to the last three days was Father John Misty's "I Love You, Honeybear." This music makes me bloodthirsty, as I used to be a dismissive asshole who was once only wounded by the "classics." Only influential music that was being pushed into the streets 30 years before my birth was deemed worthy. But now, if this analogy is catching, I want to be more than wounded.

I thought of Lianne La Havas, Julia Holter, Lil B., The Courtneys, Kurt Vile, Phony PPL and Jank. Then I thought of more popular acts like Travis Scott, Joey Bada$$ and Frank Ocean, among others. Though these don't depict an extremely diverse palate, I seem to be undergoing, as I listen to music now, a dissolution of my ego. Once the personality is detonated for a few hours at a time, you become stronger as to who the fullest of your existent self is. This is a recommended practice, if one has the intentions of "exploring."
Even in acts I’m not particularly fond of, such as groups like FIDLAR, I still find an unimagined beauty within the music. This is likely because I’m aware of the freshness and original spin. All that can be revealed in articulations and certain responses from an artist can only inspire. I find looking at lyrics and biographies very helpful. Read a dictionary, too. Obviously, the more involved you are with the music, the more you can differentiate meanings and sincerities.

Have the media made 1950’s jazz, 1960’s psychedelic rock, early heavy metal and specific eras significant? Does the 2010s decade deserve similar treatment with the involvement of the media? I believe it will be unclassifiable with the growth of journalistic accessibility that the populace has seen, as opinions will only fragment exactly which music acts. The eras are still present in the now, truthfully. People never hear of sh***y grunge bands, nor do they hear of the underground disco of the '80s, nor do they hear of the fount of knowledge offered by Immortal Technique nor do they feel implored to listen to hip-hop samples. The media definitely make your choices feel limited, though choices are rarely that parochial. The word "genre" has not helped matters either. Keyboards are contradictory more so than not.

I realize that music is saturated and that the radio plays gazelle to any given corporations' lion. To an extent, only Beyoncé can put out a surprise album and have it go quintuple platinum (exaggeration, I know) and only Kanye can send out incendiary tweets to make an ever-evolving beast of an album. In actuality, any artist can do this, but there is a certifiable disparity between those that can impact many and those that can impact a narrow audience. It's funny because the artists who affect the narrow audience (or the indie-crowd) are equally as influential and will continue to be. Marketing and promotion is a farcical manner, since it dictates what many people listen to. You most likely wait for music to arrive, as it seeps out of party houses and top-10 iTunes charts. There's still good music, but you must look for it, as it cannot be given to you. Listening to music is already a passive venture, and so is being recommended music. An algorithm, a music publication and a YouTube music reviewer shouldn’t validate choices that you, ultimately, possess. It may be convenient, but life cannot be simulated.