Oh my...I just always seperate the 2 that's all. That's what makes sense to me...that's what this thread is about. I'd do that with lots of things. Although when it comes to paintings and such, I can honestly say I don't know what's crap and whats' good...
...BUT, I'm not as ignorant and foolish as probably most of you are as to think I can safely say that this or that painting is good just because I like it, or is crap becasue I think it's crap.
Give it up dude!
Maybe some of you should accept that you might not have a clue of what good music is...that's your problem.
Last edited by EPIIIBITES on Feb 4th, 2007 at 08:44 PM
Why? Why do you seperate them? So you will look like you know what "good" music is in the eyes of the general public?
Why aren't you comfortable enough with your own taste to say: "This is what I like, this is good music."?
I know full well it makes sense to you, but you're wrong. Many times over I have proven that music taste is subjective, and the only defense you have is "Nobody can prove it, but it can be proven I think. I don't know how, though.". You're a cop out.
You're truly hopeless. You haven't proven anything except...well...
That's quite an assumption you made about my taste with those albums. If you read at the bottom I said they're all great albums.
I like ALL those albums. I've owned ALL those albums. Some just happen to be closer to my heart than others...just because they're closer to my heart doesn't mean I should stand up and say...'I love this album...and I don't care whether anyone thinks it's a great album or not. I love it and it's great!!!"
You use that same "conforming to the general public" logic in a bunch of these threads. Maybe I don't blame you becasue I agree there are critics and fans alike that do that and it's really annoying. But sorry...you got the wrong guy if you're suggesting you've figured me out and that's GOTTA be what I'm doing. wt...???
Just relax dude. You don't get it. It's pointless going on. I've offered a plethora of analogies and humurous comparisons to help you understand.
I'd have to think after so much explanation that you're just in denial at this point, as most people are who don't get this line of thinking.
Last edited by EPIIIBITES on Feb 4th, 2007 at 09:02 PM
All it says is that you have the same tastes as other people. Our opinions don't impact a band's worth, like I said before. KMC is no ruling class on music, either.
I've been as cordial as I can be, but your being really ****ing stubborn.
WHAT'S GOOD IS AN OPINION. Just because what YOU *think* is good doesn't fit our criteria doesn't mean our opinions are wrong. Not that anyone should have to justify themselves to you, or anyone else, still we've gone to those lengths, only to have them go in one ear and out of the other.
Just leave it alone. Have your own opinion, and keep it to yourself.
Music is subjective and objective. Tastes aren't. End of story.
Last edited by Cory Chaos on Feb 4th, 2007 at 09:45 PM
You DO know what's crap and what's good TO YOU. You can see two paintings and think one is crap and one is great. What are you talking about?
Are you referring to SKILL rather than preference? Technical musical ability rather than just liking the music? What are you on about? You must be, because you're making no sense.
You CAN say it's good if you think it is, or bad if you think it is, because nobody is assuming that you are applying that to them. It's about what YOU think. There is no set quality parameter.
Yes, the concepts and ideas of good taste and bad taste exist, but the bands that fall under either catagory are not preset, by anybody. It's up to you who you put in there and where.
We're all critics. Every time you judge an album, you're critiquing it.
Just because somebody does it for a profession, it doesn't make their words factual or mean they have more knowledge.
Of course it would. Taste is totally subjective, 100% totally subjective. Movies, music, books, every piece of art...taste is subjective.
The only area music is OBJECTIVE in is if you are judging instrumental talent or musical ability, because that requires skill, skill is measureable and you can't PREFER who is better at something.
Music that you listen to is subjective. Totally and completely. Critics existing doesn't change that. Criticisms, published or not, are still opinions. You are incapable of differentiating between the concept of opinions not being equal, and subjectivity being non-existent.
A critic who knows shitloads about music has a more credible opinion than someone who just watches TRL, but that critic's opinion is no closer to being RIGHT than the TRL fan's opinion when it comes to what music they like.
Read that shit and tell me you honestly think you're making credible points.
You hate The Police but think they're a great band who make good music, you have an opinion on which band is better between STP and Nirvana, but you consider it a no contest...
You "like" The Backstreet Boys, but you call them utter crap.
You see, the problem with your argument is that you assume there is some mythical way of factually gauging which taste is better, despite admitting you don't know how or why it would be possible (It's not), and admitting that nobody can do it.
If you accept this and realise that outside of proveable areas, nothing you say is anything close to a factual statement, you will see why you are wrong.
By saying a painting is good or crap, you are simply expressing your opinion. You aren't standing there saying there was no skill involved, you aren't demeaning the painter him/herself, you are simply saying you dislike what he/she has produced, which is your right.
Someone else may disagree and say they like it.
Just like music.
That's how it is, that is a fact. You cannot oppose fact.
Out of what? Your argument consists of what, 'there's good and shit music, because there is, although I can't prove it, but people say it, I like bands, who aren't good, are shit, good, music is good and shit, I like them are shitgood shit good'.
You have literally made zero sense, and then have the audacity to point out that people aren't as senseless as you as if it casts a bad light on their knowledge.
What is your argument? Music can be qualitatively assessed, but we can't do it?