I think I hate to talk about music more than anything else.
- Thread starter Shia-Neko-Chan
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I can see a developed argument for it, since it would potentially fail sever commonly held tenets of what "music" is.someonehairy-ish said:
Same here. I enjoy talking to someone if we share the exact same tastes in music but I hate having to explain why I like a certain type of music. I just fucking do and whether you find it to be just "noise" or bad isn't something I care about. I'll like what I like and you can go on enjoying whatever it is you like.
I used to talk about music with friends all the time, but I've stopped doing so, because on the off-chance that we'd actually be in agreement, we'd have little else to talk about except music, and sadly, but predictably, none of those friendships seem to have lasted.
It certainly didn't help that my tastes in music are very inconsistent, and they change very often.
People listen to music for a variety of different reasons, and because of that, I see music as a subject that is pointless to discuss, and which I would rather avoid in conversations.
It certainly didn't help that my tastes in music are very inconsistent, and they change very often.
People listen to music for a variety of different reasons, and because of that, I see music as a subject that is pointless to discuss, and which I would rather avoid in conversations.
I don't have this problem, because while I do get excited about new songs/bands I discover from time to time, I don't feel the need to make other people like what I like. I eventually comment with friends that I'm completely obsessed with such song or band, but that's it. If they're interested in finding something new they will ask me about it, or go and listen for themselves and see if they like it.
I'm not trying to criticize you, but maybe if you investigate why you have this need and learn to live without making other people like what you like, you'll be less frustrated?
EDIT: Also, I have to say that music is often about the building of tension, and then the resolution of this tension. We tend to think a song "sounds good" because it fullfils our expectations about how the tensions will be resolved. So in some level it's always possible, especially if you have music training, to "predict" where the music is going to go at some points. You can always listen to John Cage or other music-theoretic experimental explorations if you really want to be unable to predict the progressions.
I'm not trying to criticize you, but maybe if you investigate why you have this need and learn to live without making other people like what you like, you'll be less frustrated?
EDIT: Also, I have to say that music is often about the building of tension, and then the resolution of this tension. We tend to think a song "sounds good" because it fullfils our expectations about how the tensions will be resolved. So in some level it's always possible, especially if you have music training, to "predict" where the music is going to go at some points. You can always listen to John Cage or other music-theoretic experimental explorations if you really want to be unable to predict the progressions.
Not really. Music has to be sound that has some qualities of measured rhythm and intentional arrangement. Dubstep has rhythm, obviously, and it could be argued that it is often much more complex rhythmically than most other genres because of the heavy amount of syncopation and off beat stuff that goes on. Intentionally arrangement is there. Plus there are obviously things like scales and arpeggios and keys and all that jazz being used.Zachary Amaranth said:
So dubstep is quite definitely music.
Protip: If you arrange a dubstep track for actual instruments it sounds pretty much like other styles of music. Hell, one of my friends figured out how to tap the whole of Skrillex's Nice Sprites/Nasty Monsters song (forget the full title) and hearing it you'd think that he's arranged a symphony for the bass.
Here we go, an obligatory "let me prove you wrong even if you don't like this style of music" post. But that's not why I'm replying.AnarchistFish said:
I'ma have to put a pin in this comment for a moment, but I always hate the qualifier "when done well."
"When done well," any musical form can be outright amazing. That means very little.
Not particularly, no.
Alright, the gauntlet has been thrown down. Let's see what you've got to offer.
Sounds heavily ambient. Looking them up tagged them with ambient a lot.
Hell, this one's qualified with "dubstep elements."
I could include a shotgun as a "percussive element," but it wouldn't make it music.
Mostly here, I'm going off descriptors. This "song" was so freaking boring.
There aren't any real elements I can identify here as Dubstep. There's literally nothing here that would actually separate it from electronic music in the 90s. Not really a bad song, but far from anything interesting, either.
However, it seems like you are trying to trot out examples of "Dubstep that isn't really dubstep." I've heard Trent Reznor tracks that were dub-steppier than that. And that seems to be the crux of the "when done well" thing. If one dices it fine enough, one can attempt to justify a genre by attempting to move beyond simply the genre itself.
Maybe you do think this is amazing music you've linked me to. I think it's filler, at best. The first and third tracks are okay, but are like listening to a ten second soundtrack fill on a loop. I know this is "thrilling" to some, but yawn.
I doubt you changed anyone's mind with those tracks. Though the first one sounds like it'd be good to fall asleep to. I don't think I've ever seen one of these "see? Dubstep isn't horrible!" posts met with "gosh, you're right! How did I not see this before?"
Everyone seems to think "the acts I like are special snowflakes and if I just show them to the world...." But no.
I'm just glad this conversion culture doesn't exist as strongly in other genres. Though I hear Ke$ha is an amazing vocalist "when she tries."
I can't talk about music EXCEPT with other metalheads. Because the overwhelming majority of lightweights who listen to butt-pop like Nicki Minaj and all forms of dubstep think "It's all about screaming." And it just creates this torrent of fiery hate within me that makes me incapable of continuing the conversation.
do you also think that that rap is only about drugs bitches and hoes and that if its electronic its eather awful dubstep or shallow dance fodder?Azaraxzealot said:
not sure what you mean anyway...if it has screaming then it has screaming which is very off putting for some (but can be an quired taste I supose)
No, I listened to enough music before metal and even after metal to know that every genre besides what's on the billboard top 5 these days has depth.Vault101 said:
Like electronic (and I am using this as a blanket term) music has Daft Punk, Rap has Prodigy, Hip Hop has Tupac, Funk and Jazz have too many to list, Blues Rock has Stevie Ray Vaughn, etc.
But my point is that most of what people who like Rap, Hip Hop, Pop, etc and then claim metal is all about screaming ONLY like the shallow shit like Rack City and Superbass and are not open-minded at all (which is strange since it's usually me who is called "closed-minded" even though I specifically went out of my way to find music I liked in other genres so that I wouldn't be) and to say metal is all screaming just makes me want to scream at them, chain them up, and drag them to an Opeth, Blind Guardian, or Iron Maiden show.
What they don't realize is that Metal is EVERYTHING. Literally any and every genre can and has been included in metal because there is a metal for every genre. So as to why these people whose minds are narrower than their urethras would say metal is "all about screaming" just dumbfounds me to the point of rage.
So basically you lament that other people aren't engaged by the things that you are engaged by?
I find music fans to be some of the most pretentious and downright insufferable people I've ever met - especially when they want to engage me in discussing how band A is "real" genre "Z" and band B is a "sell out" and a "rip off" of band C.
The heavy majority of people I have ever discussed music with can not understand that the whole concept of music, since it is one of the primary art forms, is ENTIRELY subjective.
You can like Rebecca Black, you can like Justin Beiber, you can like Nickelback you can like Miley Cyrus or whatever boy band is currently cycling through the industry. I do not understand why people want to shame bands or types of music - they are essentially directly insulting other people for something that is completely subjective. The only person who looks like a fool is the heckler.
Discussions in music 99% of the time gravitate towards people treating subjectivity as a litmus test for someone else's class or taste. But when you point out the issue is entirely subjective they will respond with "Of course it is" then proceed to disreguard the whole concept of subjectivity.
It's pretty much another way of saying "I'm not racist, but..."
The heavy majority of people I have ever discussed music with can not understand that the whole concept of music, since it is one of the primary art forms, is ENTIRELY subjective.
You can like Rebecca Black, you can like Justin Beiber, you can like Nickelback you can like Miley Cyrus or whatever boy band is currently cycling through the industry. I do not understand why people want to shame bands or types of music - they are essentially directly insulting other people for something that is completely subjective. The only person who looks like a fool is the heckler.
Discussions in music 99% of the time gravitate towards people treating subjectivity as a litmus test for someone else's class or taste. But when you point out the issue is entirely subjective they will respond with "Of course it is" then proceed to disreguard the whole concept of subjectivity.
It's pretty much another way of saying "I'm not racist, but..."
Yeah making an objective statement about a style of music not being good and me trying to change their mind is wrong?? Ok.Zachary Amaranth said:
FairZachary Amaranth said:
I have no idea how dubstep couldn't be classified as music. That's just such a ridiculous statement.Zachary Amaranth said:
Yeah, but it's still dubstep. How isn't it music exactly?Zachary Amaranth said:
It has textures, rhythm, harmonies, I don't understand how this isn't music even if you don't like it. Don't know what your point is about the percussion.Zachary Amaranth said:
Do you actually know what dubstep is? How are those beats not a 2-step beats? The one thing which is pretty much fundamental to every dubstep track? And Burial, not dubstep, really? The guy has pretty much symbolised the genre since 2007.Zachary Amaranth said:
Considering dubstep was formed in the 90s I don't see your point there. It's developed from 2 step, which again, is a 90s genre. And that aspect is what separates it from other electronic subgenres.Zachary Amaranth said:
Filler? Listening through earphones really brings out the intricacies, listening through speakers doesn't make those things apparent.Zachary Amaranth said:
I don't see your problem with me trying to expose people to music they may or may not like but if you don't like them, whatever. But saying those tracks aren't dubstep is just ignorant. And dismissing a genre as "not music" just because you like it is too.
One of the most hypocritical posts I've ever seen.Azaraxzealot said:
No problemVault101 said:
It's all too easy to mistake the two. I have fallen into that trap all too often.