Although it is a given that music appreciation is subjective and we all have the right to like whatever we like, there are times when you just have to question peoples' motives for liking what they do.
For example, about 25 years ago I was in Vancouver BC when I heard that Segovia (classic guitar great) was coming through town. I was surprised to notice that the concert was going to be held in a fairly large theatre and I was sure that when I got there I'd find it in one of the smaller associated venues. I could not imagine that more than a couple of hundred people in Vancouver would play or be interested in classic guitar. When I arrived there were closer to 2500 people - all dressed in furs and pearls etc!?
Our seats turned out to be in about the 20th row. Segovia it seems was a bit of a primadonna and as a matter of principle refused to use amplification of any kind. The program that everybody got explained this fact and asked people to be as quiet as possible during the performance.
You can guess the rest. At first it wasn't to bad and you could hear about 95% of the music - soft passages were lost simply because of the size of the hall and the distance. Then someone coughed, which seemed to be the signal for someone else to unwrap a mint and then for someone to whisper a comment. Soon only about 50% was audible and more whispering and rattling of paper ensued. By about half way through the concert, it sounded like a polite bus station and Segovia was lost in the crowd.
I refer to these people as the "opera set" (sorry opera fans) and I really believe that "they" patronize many arts (and thus keep "atonalism" funded) more because it is "the thing to do" rather than out of a genuine thrill of the listening experience.
Segovia is long gone now but that night lives on as an eye opener for me!
Harp Content: only that I'm still singin' the blues about the cost of those tickets!