I like Yuki's works coz it's by Yuki.
LOL, sounds like a valid diagnosis for us.
Being a fan of something means recognizing the flaws and still liking it despite them.
These factors differ, too. Applied to myself, being a fan rather means recognizing the flaws and not giving a damn about them.
That has something to do with personal standards, too, I assume. There's no denying that I'm generally tolerant about repetitiveness that even I acknowledge, provided I like the artist anyway. The most recent examples would be Yura Hatsuki and Yousei Teikoku who both have quite a number of similarly modeled songs. I also like Ali Project despite having been exposed mostly to their anime contributions (and they do give the impression that anime producers tend to want Katakura to serve them "something like what you did for that Bee Train animu back in 2001"). And I easily admit that both Mike Oldfield and Elton John (the two whales who share the top of my personal chart with Yuki) are prone to repetitiveness. I just fail to care, because their music still has that certain something that made me their fan. And while they have it, I'll follow their works.
It's also a matter of style here to me. I don't place Yuki to stand on others' failings but on the fact that she does something I believe the whole industry should be doing by now but doesn't seem to bother to - successfully blending pop and classic trends. This IS my IMHO, and that may not be such a merit in Japanese music where we know a good number of artists doing just that, but I, who have grown up on Russian and Western pop music, can't but draw comparisons - and they're hardly in favour of even the UK/US where Japan supposedly drew most modern pop music trends from. That's what makes me insist that Yuki's music is
good. Stating such a thing without comparison will always be downright subjective since there are not many
unanimously accepted criteria for good pop music, and what is good to one may be bland at most to another. But if I compare Yuki to the whole industry, including Western and Eastern European pop, it looks clear that she stands out from quite a crowd. Plus it seems a proved point already that she's able to compose beautiful music. Again, not to everyone, but to me these two factors definitely sum up to make the definition of GOOD. The comparison with those artists who also qualify completely in both criteria may very likely lower the degree of Yuki's "phenomenality" - but I choose not to indulge in debates over her being better/worse than Akiko Shikata/Mikiya Katakura/Yoko Kanno/KOKIA/[insert name here]; I tend to see this bunch as the same league.
And concerning the value of "____ does that, too" arguments... I thin kI need to repeat again - my comments on repetitiveness stuff are meant to show not that "others are just as faulty as Kajiura" but that "Kajiura doesn't do anything which is prosecuted in the industry". If it was, I doubt she would be continuing it thus far. A lot of artists are prone to using old recipes time and time again, a lot of people in their fandoms are prone to getting tired of those recipes and the resulting predictability sooner or later. Disappointment is not a feeling to be blamed for; the general angst regarding the artist's state of creativity that may derive from this disappintment is what the more loyal (read: unbothered) fans [with possibly lower demands/standards, if you like] will always find questionable. As much as we may get bored of new song and OST decisions, Kalafina, Madoka and Pandora Hearts attract people to Yuki's name just as .hack//SIGN OSTs did back in the early 2000s. And it shows that repetitiveness and decreasing quality are not always the companions in an artist's career.
Then again, I'm afraid I have this opinion regarding Verthand's question that Ponti quoted:
Pachebel´s Canon in D is 6 minutes of playing the same 8 chords one after the other, Bach spent his whole life composing baroque, and many artist have one style and stick to it forever and are just awesome. Why cant others do that too?
You see, Bach, Pachebel and other "practical scholars of music" as I call them are not the best examples for this question. Remember how I told Grunty that not many people in pop music do music "for the art"? That's the difference. A classically-trained genius dedicating his or her life to traditional classical school WILL do it for the art. Such people create things to be used for reference, practice and textbook study for years to come (even if those years start counting long after their death). I don't say they didn't compose because they liked it, but the way their genius worked made it so - and their heritage, however repetitive, was accepted as a cornerstone of music. Of course, most of their works may remain known only to music academy graduates, but they are not considered to be strictly for mass appeal anyway. Making their heritage mass-appealing is what pop music is meant to do when it comes close to synthesis of modern and classic. But pop music doesn't have the demands of classical music, and alas, neither does it have the luxury to consist of copypaste sheets alone. Because it is POPULAR music - catering to people's thoughts, feelings and moods, both concrete and vague, both lasting and brief, both elated and mundane. Plus pop artists, regardless of the money question, make music because they like making music, more often than not. And if you mean to be popular in that, playing the same piece all over again with minor chord variations may get you in serious trouble even with a Mozart level talent.
Normal music fans, unlike trained critics, tend to be more outspoken about such things because they are not obliged to value it all for scholarly purpose only.
Which is, to a certain extent, an explanation to how this thread appeared.
All in all, this IS a forum, so there is room for negative opinions and positive retorts (and vice versa, I guess
). Like I said, I find it mostly fun. Not to mention that some of our more constant critics' attitude has already become amiably memetic and actually somewhat of a guidance point. Whenever I see that Grunty says he liked something, I can't help thinking "Oh wow, then this is a first priority MUST CHECK item".
Having a comrade with demands and standards higher than yours can be very rewarding.
