used in a response to a post I put on here. Have no idea what it is nor OOAA. Can I have an English translation please as my brain doesn't compute.

I dont know a lot of the time why I like the music I do when there is no obvious common thread. Then I think Obvious is the key word - what is Obvious? At the recent mingle in Liverpool I was talking to RichieRichie and found out he was a big Tom Russell fan as I have been for some time. He was also wearing a 'Show of hands' tee shirt and we got speaking about their wonderful compilation that I own and it is a band he has seen on a number of occasions. Fairly unusual that 2 people share an interest in 2 less than mainstream artists. Then I see he also posted a reverential missive about Jackie Leven - again I am a massive fan. So either this is complete serendipity or there is a link that is not obvious. Maybe a desire to love the rebel/maverick performers? Leven and Russell would both come under that heading but how does that explain Show of Hands? Spooky.

which can be very varied - it could be a lyric that, to misquote Morrissey, says something to you about your life; it could be a song or a sound that triggers a memory; a tune (or even a riff) that resonates with you; or a voice that you can associate with.

So, for example, I can quite happily listen to a sequence of songs by Scott Walker, Thin Lizzy, Stevie Wonder, Nanci Griffith, The Monkees and Linton Kwesi Johnson because they will tick one or more of those boxes.

In contrast, a playlist that features Led Zeppelin, The Smiths, Fairport Convention, Genesis, Joy Division and NWA wouldn't do it for me at all.

But I'm sure the complete reverse will apply to other members of the Massive

There are theories that individuals have different levels of musicality; sensitivity to/talent for music, similar to certain people having a propensity to learn different languages. Science examines our senses and sensory perception in terms of cortical maps, parts of the brain's cortex that processes information input via our senses.

In terms of music/musicality this includes processes for distinguishing enjoyable sounds (e.g. speech patterns and music patterns) from noise (e.g. the brain's "instinct" receptors say noise is a threat and therefore processes that information in a different way to music) which relate to frequency, pitch, harmony etc. If certain cortical maps are exercised more (through greater exposure to certain types of music) then the plasticity of the cortex is enhanced, i.e. the listener becomes more "attuned" to that type of music because that area of the cortex becomes bigger or more adept at managing our responses to that type of music.

A greater concentration of exposure to music/musicality in the cortex can also increase the facility for the brain to identify patterns or connections in music that may not be immediately apparent to those with an "untrained ear". That's not training in terms of organised music teaching but untrained in terms of less exposure to music or certain types of music. One person listens to Big Country for the first time and their cortex has a field day while the next person's cortex stays non-plussed.

There is evidence (from brain imaging) that the brain throws more neurons at areas of the cortex (i.e. to increase plasticity) that are stimulated by constant or regular exposure to sensory-based processing and this can be as broad as providing more processing power for music per se or more processing power for the multiple stimuli contained in patterns of music, the creation of multiple neuron channels that provide the hitherto unidentified connection between Tom Russell and Show of Hands. These paths grow more adept at finding connections in, for want of a better phrase, the language of music: pitch, time scales, harmony, melody, rhythm. These connections are stimulated in ways we are not consciously aware hence we wonder why we can be very diverse in our musical tastes, enjoy Gershwin and Gaga in equal measure.

Ultimately these biological/physiological processes are there to serve our response to music, not to serve music itself. In this context you can say that music itself has no purpose to us as human beings, it is solely our response to it that has a purpose and the brain will adapt accordingly to ensure we maximise how we respond to music which is to keep us pleasured. And on each individual's cortex plasticity spectrum that can be as diverse as listening to Metal Machine Music every day or exposing yourself to new music every day. In either scenario the desired response is the same: the stimulation of that part of the brain that gives us pleasure.

EDIT John Powell's book How Music Works is a good starting point to understanding more about what music is doing. I read it last year and it made me want to know more about the scientific aspects of the way music affects us.

...I could offer the observation that a lot of them use a modal sound in much of their music, which is maybe a common sound that you're drawn to?

A drone-y sound in layman's terms - not being exactly major or minor. Baroque and rennaisance music will certainly have this (Handel and Tallis), ditto a lot of folk music (Fairport) and John Martyn's modal-jazz/folk thing, and ditto Big Country's self-consciously bagpipey guitar sound. OMD, from memory, used a lot of synth wash drone/pedal in some of their music (eg all that stuff about Joan of Arc). Can't really comment on the Jam or Carter - don't know enough of their music.

Obviously, OAAA and all that...

and I pray that this doesn't sound daft, many years ago one afternoon I took a stroll through the Tate Gallery (in Pimlico, the original one), light streaming through the skylight, just a few other strollers here and there, nice and peaceful, when as I slowly walked through a gallery looking at paintings askance contemplating what I should have for dinner I chanced upon and sidled up to a Picasso (Seated Nude - Cubist period as you're asking) that I had never seen before and didn't even know I'd have liked. But, in a sudden moment without even thinking about it, I thought it was so wonderful I nearly found myself conjuring up a tear or two (of joy). I've gotten worse with age.

Music, like humour (Lord Chesterfield wrote that as soon as he found complete reason he lost the ability to laugh), is still a bit of a mystery and I quite like it that way. It must be our way, a visceral way, of connecting with our emotions. Much in the same way listening to the Lurkers made me want to pogo.