I have a wide and eclectic musical taste, (a multi-instrumentalist and singer too) encouraged by by parents when young - my mother had wanted to learn an instrument and could sing very well, but came the depression and there was no money, when the money became available, her younger brothers & sisters (who never touched an instrument again and rarely sang!) got the music lessons - my father was a very good classically trained violinist, who didn't see much in certain types of jazz, but liked swing, musicals, pop, etc. Both tended to like everything from opera to pop, but in mixed and varying doses.

So do I. In folk, I tend to prefer instrumental ensembles, with or without singers

With 'bluegrass', I often tend to have much the same reaction as with 'irish' music - the quote from the movie 'Amadeus' says it all "too many notes for the ear to hear". The locally available players seem to tend to concentrate on technical and agility & proficiency at high speed, and the availability of slower instrumental material, and unaccompanied vocal material is far less overall.

My father once was listening to a very young me showing off just how fast I could play things (with absolutely no expression!) and managed to open my mind. He told me that any fool with only very limited musical talent and ability can play fast and loud, because it's easier and requires less technical control than playing slower and quieter, and then picked up his violin and very slowly and steadily drew the bow from the frog to the tip taking minutes to generate a very soft and very pure unwavering tone (he used to play 'hot canary and other fast pieces occasionally too, you know).

I like all types of music, from the 'primitive' throat singing styles to opera, instrumental from accapella solo to massed choirs with orchestra & pipe organ, my personal preference when playing is ensemble rather than solo. I was trained as an accompanist by my father, and did a lot of it, playing piano & pipe organ for church singing from kids to congregations, and even in a school orchestra. Listening sensitively to what other are doing is far more satisfying than being a soloist - when I worked in amateur theatre with very limited resources, I found that lack of resources does not inhibit artistic expression, indeed a restriction on choices seems to promote creativity. I also prefer singing harmony to solo personally for much the same reasons.

I do like good practitioners who can belt out a tune faster than I can, but it seems just a sort of ego game to me, fun to do occasionally - like the 'how long can you hold a note' singing game, which if I know it is about to happen, I can 'turn on' the technique, and hang on with the best of them - as one who was thought to have asthma as a youngster and did breathing exercises and theatre techniques such as intercostal breathing so as one can 'play dead' - I do have quite a degree of breath control, but not as good as a professional opera singer!, but if you have put the effort into developing your technical skills to handle slower playing, just pure speed gets very boring after a while.

Of course I have seen many people (often non-instrumental spectators) decry slow pieces and demand 'more speed', as if that is the only worthwhile musical criteria.

Often makes me wonder about their lovemaking techniques.... ;-)

Robin