I was on a site I frequent quite a lot and I got into a conversation about music.Basically it was about how good music and bad music were subjective positions,but I disagree.I was just wondering about other peoples opinions on this: Is the quality of music subjective,or is there a way to determine the quality of music objectively?
Good music v. Bad music
- Thread starter ajh93
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, what genres you find good and bad is subjective, but certain things, like Disney manufactured pop is just bad. No ifs, no buts, just bad.
De gustibus non est disputandem. (my latin's rusty, so i probably spelled that wrong...)
all "art" is subject to taste. what one person (or one billion people) finds to be good, another person (or another billion) might despise and find to be infantile scribbling. case in point: i feel that Picasso, widely cited as one of the greatest artists to ever live, is overrated at best, and a scrawler at worst. but that's my opinion.
to bring it back to music: some people like noisecore, and find beauty in it. most people find it abrasive, unenjoyable, and even offensive.
perfect case in point. this is one of my absolute favorite bands, and this particular song is pretty much a giant "fuck you" to the mainstream music industry. literally, they're asking "don't you think we could make a multi-platinum album and rake in the money (italics paraphrased and condensed from all verses)? we could, but... (noise)". the thing is, this band is capable of making very beautiful music. but even then it's not to everyone's taste.
and because i feel like sharing, my favorite Neubauten song:
even that song, which i find to be incredibly beautiful, nuanced, and poetic, most people would hear as abrasive noise.
all "art" is subject to taste. what one person (or one billion people) finds to be good, another person (or another billion) might despise and find to be infantile scribbling. case in point: i feel that Picasso, widely cited as one of the greatest artists to ever live, is overrated at best, and a scrawler at worst. but that's my opinion.
to bring it back to music: some people like noisecore, and find beauty in it. most people find it abrasive, unenjoyable, and even offensive.
perfect case in point. this is one of my absolute favorite bands, and this particular song is pretty much a giant "fuck you" to the mainstream music industry. literally, they're asking "don't you think we could make a multi-platinum album and rake in the money (italics paraphrased and condensed from all verses)? we could, but... (noise)". the thing is, this band is capable of making very beautiful music. but even then it's not to everyone's taste.
and because i feel like sharing, my favorite Neubauten song:
even that song, which i find to be incredibly beautiful, nuanced, and poetic, most people would hear as abrasive noise.
I'm the weird kind of person who enjoys both rock/metal and trance/techno. I rarely get into "your music taste sucks" arguments.
Except that stuff.NeedAUserName said:
subjective. Just like a good game or film is subjective.
Part of it is that if everyone followed a certain formula, it would become stale and then hated, so any objective standards you could place, at any time, can be taken down.
Part of it is that if everyone followed a certain formula, it would become stale and then hated, so any objective standards you could place, at any time, can be taken down.
now look at this
To my knowledge it is basically a remix of what people are saying during a tornado, add auto tune and stuff.
As far as mainstream music, it wouldn't work, but when I'm just sitting around, playing something in the background, I have found this one to be rather funny because I've already tried to examine it as a parady or a satire.
Even other than how it sounds, can it have points for originality? Is it a statement against boybands, basically saying that with autotune anything can sound nice?
Even with auto tune, does that mean that whatever effort the boy bands put into it isn't deserved because it isn't 100 percent authentic? Does actual singing have to be a part of music? I mean, classical music used to be pretty big without words, and now it sounds like a bit of a niche thing if you have something without words. Whether it is techno, nature sounds, or a symphony, can you determine if it is or isn't good music by that?
A bit of a ramble, but I think my points are in there somewhere.
To my knowledge it is basically a remix of what people are saying during a tornado, add auto tune and stuff.
As far as mainstream music, it wouldn't work, but when I'm just sitting around, playing something in the background, I have found this one to be rather funny because I've already tried to examine it as a parady or a satire.
Even other than how it sounds, can it have points for originality? Is it a statement against boybands, basically saying that with autotune anything can sound nice?
Even with auto tune, does that mean that whatever effort the boy bands put into it isn't deserved because it isn't 100 percent authentic? Does actual singing have to be a part of music? I mean, classical music used to be pretty big without words, and now it sounds like a bit of a niche thing if you have something without words. Whether it is techno, nature sounds, or a symphony, can you determine if it is or isn't good music by that?
A bit of a ramble, but I think my points are in there somewhere.
i wouldn't say it's pointless. but i would agree that you shouldn't expect anyone to change their opinion based on what someone else says (though that does happen, and quite often, at that). also, a lot of my favorite music is stuff that i can dissect and analyze and pick apart.sravankb said:
however, the very fact that i'm responding to what you said emphasizes the whole point of subjectivity. opinions are opinions, and taste is taste. "one man's soap is another man's... waste."
however...
no, dude, it's still totally ok to mock Bieber fans. and yes, i acknowledge the hypocrisy in my statement. still... f'in Bieber.TornadoFive said:
Music will always be a subjective thing. People have different tastes in music, always will. Yeah, some types of music, even some individual songs or artists are liked or disliked more than others, but it's always just an opinion.
I don't like Justin Biebers' music, but I wouldn't mock someone who said they did like it. It's their opinion, who am I to say otherwise.
I don't like Justin Biebers' music, but I wouldn't mock someone who said they did like it. It's their opinion, who am I to say otherwise.
Objectively subjective, or Subjectively objective.
Any piece of music by it self is subjective, but techniques used w/ in the music can be looked at objectively to an extent. If someone is trying to play their guitar like Dimebag Darrell (deceased guitarist from PanterA) then you can objectively compare the two composers, but if they took ques from Dimebag then any adaptation they have made is completely subjective to whether its better or not.
Any piece of music by it self is subjective, but techniques used w/ in the music can be looked at objectively to an extent. If someone is trying to play their guitar like Dimebag Darrell (deceased guitarist from PanterA) then you can objectively compare the two composers, but if they took ques from Dimebag then any adaptation they have made is completely subjective to whether its better or not.
There are a few undenyable ways that music can be bad or good.
A: Does the musician know how to use his instrument to get the effect HE is trying for.
B Is there a rhythm? Music is basically nothing but rhythm, the amount can vary ,the way its delivered can be varied, but at a base to be consider music it must have even the tiniest bit of rhythm.
As you can see almost anything can be called good music from a 2 year old hitting pans (1 obtaining the sound he is attempting and having rhythm at its most rudimentary form) to a large orchestral piece played perfectly.
A: Does the musician know how to use his instrument to get the effect HE is trying for.
B Is there a rhythm? Music is basically nothing but rhythm, the amount can vary ,the way its delivered can be varied, but at a base to be consider music it must have even the tiniest bit of rhythm.
As you can see almost anything can be called good music from a 2 year old hitting pans (1 obtaining the sound he is attempting and having rhythm at its most rudimentary form) to a large orchestral piece played perfectly.
Dude, your the exact same as me. Im pretty open to music, but I can't stand mainstream pop. Love my techno and rock.AetherWolf said:
What someone thinks of any given piece of music is subjective.
This may be based on objective qualities of the music such as volume, rhythm, pitch range and proportions, the theme of the lyrics (or even their presence at all) and many more, as well as how all these things come together as a single entity.
But yeah, ultimately it is up to the individual. It is entirely possible for someone to genuinely enjoy that which, to someone else, might be the most horrendously discordant eardrum assault they can imagine and neither party can be accurately called wrong about this.
This may be based on objective qualities of the music such as volume, rhythm, pitch range and proportions, the theme of the lyrics (or even their presence at all) and many more, as well as how all these things come together as a single entity.
But yeah, ultimately it is up to the individual. It is entirely possible for someone to genuinely enjoy that which, to someone else, might be the most horrendously discordant eardrum assault they can imagine and neither party can be accurately called wrong about this.
I shouldn't even post because the same thing is going to be said by a hundred other people but there's no good music or bad music. It's all based on what you like, I like metal, my sister likes pop, my dad likes country. my mom like techno. Actually so do I, my mom is awesome. None of us are wrong.