Stuart, I like your point about guitar vs. piano, which is something I hadn't considered. Agree that it is harder to express an emotion with piano music without coming off as maudlin; there's something just more dramatic about the sound of a piano which easily lends itself to this evocation. The mass popularity of rock/pop music can likely be attributed to the fact that guitar-based songs are more accessible to people because they don't sound like the musicians are putting on airs. Also, guitars can be a lot more visceral, and therefore more immediately satisfying for the listener. When a piano tries to be visceral, it just sounds over-dramatic, and there we come back to the 'putting on airs' critique.

Which brings us to Brian's point, about liking female singer-songwriters who are more 'male', which I take to mean more aggressive in terms of lyrics or arrangements. Was thinking of my favourite female singer-songwriters and they aren't necessarily the ones that sound 'more male' but those that are 'edgy' in a different way. Those female singer songwriters that do it for me tend to be those who are more 'feminine' in a lot of ways, but produce either a lusher sound or are quirky-edgy instead of agressive edgy (ie. Bjork or Cibelle versus Emm Gryner). I realize that Emily Haines may fall into the latter category, at least with respect to her Metric work, but what I like most about this solo disc is the lusher, more feminine feel to it.

As for yuppie romantic drivel, much of the work of Sarah McLaughlin, along with that of Norah Jones, Chantal Krevetsiak, Michelle Branch, et al falls into a genre that can best be described as "Starbucks", as this is what you usually hear whenever you're ordering that skinny double venti latte no foam no whip.