Is music really subjective?

[Astoria]

I believe there's a difference between liking something and acknowledging that it's good. I can't stand music like Beyonce and Ke$ha but I can see why people do and so I can say they are good at what they do. With Friday however that is either a very delusioned girl or a prime example of a record label exploiting someone. There's music...and then there's just noise.

 

[Nouw]

Music is subjective[sub]that is if it can be technically called music. Refer to melody, harmony, tempo, rhythm and etc[/sub]for there will never be a 'good' or 'bad' song. It is art and art can never be judged by anyone. Your opinion is just as valid as a critic or reviewer.

Having said that, art can be technically judged. A book that is grammatically perfect with a plot that has rarely been used in the history of literature can be technically better than a book with grammatical errors in every paragraph and a cliched plot.

I could still enjoy the latter book even if it is technically terrible.

 

[loodmoney]

technically speaking, music is objective.
If you look at the basic form of it without all of the bling, you'll learn that it is objective.
The first thing you learn in the subject of harmony is the Intervals that create Chords. These Intervals are divided into two groups - Cossonant and Dissonant. Cossonant are nice to hear while Dissonant usually sounds like two cats trying to kill each other.
If you string them together in the best way humanly possible (with other supporting roles, themes and rythem) you have the greatest music ever created.

Not entirely right. Notice that your analysis still involves essentially subjective terms: "Cossonant are nice"; "string them together in the best way humanly possible". Until you can describe what makes one chord good and another chord bad in a way that does not use subjective terms like good or bad you haven't shown that musical taste is objective.

Not to mention that what we consider consonant would be considered dissonant by the standards of a contemporary of Mozart; other musical traditions do not categorise sounds as we do (e.g. systems where 1/8th tone changes are counted as different notes would sound off-tune to us).

I for one, believe that most music is subjective, and that beauty is in the eye of the beholder etc etc, But there is (and forgive the over-used example which I'm pretty sure you will be sick of by now) no excuse for music like Rebecca Black's Friday.
discuss.

Even if everybody in the world agreed that a song was good or bad, that does not prove that it is objectively good or bad. All it shows is that everyone has the same subjective view.

 

[BonsaiK]

I was just wondering...
Do you think that all music is subjective or not?(please read the whole OP)
Don't flame me. I fully understand that one person's most hated song could be the next man's favorite but do you think that some music is, put simply, objectively bad regardless of some people's opinions?

I for one, believe that most music is subjective, and that beauty is in the eye of the beholder etc etc, But there is (and forgive the over-used example which I'm pretty sure you will be sick of by now) no excuse for music like Rebecca Black's Friday.

Remember I'm talking about music as an ART FORM here.

discuss.

What is it about morbid picking on 13 year old girls that you Escapists seem to enjoy so much?

All music is art.

All art is subjective.

I'm qualified to tell you this.

That is all.

 

[EventHorizon]

-bump...?

updated the OP, I was tired when I posted this and didn't really know what I meant... the original OP was a bit stupid... and the first half of it still is.

 

[Nerfherder17]

Something like serialism or any kind of atonal music is (on the whole), not typically enjoyed by most people, compared to a tonal or "normal" song. Yes the intervals exist for a reason.

Also agree with Angerwing