Objectivity in Music.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

No talent leads to NO music. You have a talent somewhere if you can even make music with instruments to begin with.

talent does not equal the ability to simply and literally pick up an instrument and produce sounds with it. anyone with fingers can accomplish this. i agree that those with less talent can produce better music than those with far more talent. perfect example: i love the ramones and hate ted nugent.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
"Good music" is entirely subjective. There is no fact, truth or objectivity in there. Nobody can deny Dave Lombardo's skill as a drummer, but there are people who hate Slayer's songs. They're not wrong.

-AC

yes they would be wrong. to deny slayer is to discredit one's self utterly and eternally. 😛

which one did you pick AC? i picked the second one.

Originally posted by Schecter
talent does not equal the ability to simply and literally pick up an instrument and produce sounds with it. anyone with fingers can accomplish this. i agree that those with less talent can produce better music than those with far more talent. perfect example: i love the ramones and hate ted nugent.

Yes, and it's a skill, a talent. It doesn't mean they are a talented guitarist, it means they possess the talent that is the ability to play the instrument.

Frank Zappa was not an amazing drummer, he did possess talent to play drums though, he was also an amazing writer for the drums.

Originally posted by Schecter
yes they would be wrong. to deny slayer is to discredit one's self utterly and eternally. 😛

They wouldn't be wrong, I do know you know this.

Originally posted by Phat J
which one did you pick AC? i picked the second one.

Why, do you want to pick the opposite of whatever I choose?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It does not MATTER if it's overwhelming in a consensus, it's still JUST OPINION. This means it is STILL SUBJECTIVE.

It is opinion...and it is subjective...but it's informed subjective opinion. And when informed subjective opinions come together and all pretty much point to the same thing...you start to see a truth being demonstrated (although not proven by any facts).

Meaning these informed opinions have been tried and true many times over where these people have more often than not agreed that someone like Brittney Spears makes poor music.

There's a reason it's overwheliming in consensus.

Now, you gotta wonder why that is.

I think I know why it is...

Because at the end of the day, there truly is bad music...and people can point to that overwhelmingly time and again.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
It is opinion...and it is subjective...but it's informed subjective opinion.

Good boy. So the "Informed" part adds...what? POSSIBLE credibility. Not truth and fact, it adds possible credibility.

There are writers from the NME, a FAMOUS music magazine, that have "informed" opinions on music. They would tell you that Lil' Chris makes good music. Informed just means experience, more or less. Profession does not add anything more.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Meaning it's been tried and true many times over where these people have more often than not agreed that Brittney Spears makes poor music.

So? What's your point? Loads of people agree that she makes poor music, it's not A truth. It's a mass opinion.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
There's a reason it's overwheliming in consensus.

Yeah, they all happen to share an opinion. That's the reason.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Now, you gotta wonder why that is.

Because it's a common opinion, as is the opposing one.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I think I know why it is...

Because at the end of the day, there truly is bad music...and people can point to that.

No, people can point to music they think is bad. It will never be a truth.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Yes, and it's a skill, a talent. It doesn't mean they are a talented guitarist, it means they possess the talent that is the ability to play the instrument.

dont load my point into a completely different one and then agree with it. you know what i said and what i meant. the ability to plug in an electric guitar and make noise with it (whether that means hitting a string or just throwing it to the ground) does not equal talent and music. if someone listens to the odd sound a guitar makes when hurled at the ground and says "whoa that was cool", does that make it music?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Frank Zappa was not an amazing drummer, he did possess talent to play drums though, he was also an amazing writer for the drums.

i understand. talent does not necessarily mean amazing. never disagreed

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
They wouldn't be wrong, I do know you know this.

-AC

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Smart? Cool? What?

How about you read this and get caught up before you start just saying whatever...

Just for fun though I'll reply to this "Who cares if you can't prove it with facts. It's a reality."
Reality - The state of being real, yes? Real - true or occurring in fact, yes? True - the actual state of a matter or in conformity with fact. It cannot be reality if there are not facts to support the theory. I'm sorry, no I'm not, but you are wrong, factually.

Originally posted by Schecter
dont load my point into a completely different one and then agree with it. you know what i said and what i meant. the ability to plug in an electric guitar and make noise with it (whether that means hitting a string or just throwing it to the ground) does not equal talent and music. if someone listens to the odd sound a guitar makes when hurled at the ground and says "whoa that was cool", does that make it music?

Hitting a string or throwing it does not equal playing it. If you have the ability to play a guitar properly, it is a skill and a talent. There are billions of levels of talent, saying a beginner has the talent to play the instrument properly does not mean I'm saying he's Hendrix.

To answer your second question, if they want it to, yes. Have you ever heard Fantomas?

Go an listen to Atlantis to Interzone by Klaxons. Like it or not, that's a song and that is music. That song came about by Simon of the band completely messing around with his keyboard, not INTENDING to write or play anything. His literal thought process was "That sounds good.", and to him, it did. So regardless of whether anyone disagrees, neither are right or wrong.

Originally posted by Schecter
i understand. talent does not necessarily mean amazing. never disagreed

Good.

Originally posted by Schecter
dude, for real...
unpucker your sphincter a bit and lighten up.
i guess epIII has you in a huff but i assure you this is simply me stating my own views.

He doesn't have me in a huff, he has me rather confused for reasons stated. What also confuses me is you coming in saying things that are quite obviously untrue. I don't get why you would do that. As a joke, perhaps. I just don't see the continual need to keep playing the pragmatist.

-AC

AC's problem...

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I argue that people who have informed opinions about music and use such criteria (although they probably don't do it as consciously) will more or less tend to agree with each other that Brittney is crap.

THAT'S your problem.

You're blocking out the reality of the situation...simply becasue there's no facts associated with it.

But you're not considering what it might mean in light of my argument about music being "truly" bad, and how these people are demonstrating that, without ever really proving it.

That is why you fail to understand and others don't.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
AC's problem...

You're not giving any weight or consideration to this very real point.

THAT'S your problem.

You're blocking out the reality of the situation...simply becasue there's no facts associated with it.

You are arguing that people with informed opinions will agree Britney is crap. Ok, so what? So what if they do?

It doesn't mean her music is factually bad, it means loads of people with opinions, informed or otherwise, agree that they THINK her music is bad.

Writers having an "informed" opinion does not make them any more right or less agreeable. Schecter, as a long time listener, has an informed opinion. People on this site have INFORMED opinions, some more so than others.

There are some opinions more or less credible than others, but people agreeing means nothing more than they share an opinion.

YOU assuming that it means something greater is where YOUR problem lies. Your thought process is:

"Loads of people with informed opinions agree...that MUST mean something.". Yes, it means they share an opinion, that's all.

Furthermore, you don't have the right to decide what opinions are informed or not.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

He doesn't have me in a huff, he has me rather confused for reasons stated. What also confuses me is you coming in saying things that are quite obviously untrue. I don't get why you would do that. As a joke, perhaps. I just don't see the continual need to keep playing the pragmatist.

-AC

im expressing my views, however flawed they so obviously and factually are to you. is there a problem? did i invade your clubhouse? 🙄
fine ill leave.

You saying "Anyone who denys Slayer being good, discredits themselves." is fine by me, I do get that you are joking. Or, maybe you're not, maybe to you, someone saying they suck lessens your view of them, and that's cool, there's nothing I have a problem with there.

My only point was; Do you actually believe they are factually, truthfully and objectively incorrect to not like Slayer's music? I don't believe that's your opinion, but continually insisting it, even as a joke, had me wondering.

-AC

Originally posted by Eis
It cannot be reality if there are not facts to support the theory. I'm sorry, no I'm not, but you are wrong, factually.

I think in terms of universal truths...and in terms of truths not ALWAYS being provable by fact. Some are...some aren't.

Some truths exists apart from facts proving them.

They're divine.

They're beyond.

They're unprovable.

They're not "AC is a male"...that's a fact.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I disagree with that statement...and to think you actually KNOW it's right is claiming quite a lot.

I think in terms of universal truths...and in terms of truths not ALWAYS being provable by fact. Some are...some aren't.

Some truths exists apart from facts proving them.

They're divine.

They're beyond.

They're unprovable.

This gets better.

It's not incapable of being proven, it HAS been proven, YOU are incapable of accepting that.

But of course, it's not you, WE are all wrong, aren't we?

-AC

Some of them...read the post.

continually? i said it once, punctuated it with a smilie for the slow-witted (not you) and those who would use it as a torch of victory to run with (you)

Originally posted by Schecter

yes they would be wrong. to deny slayer is to discredit one's self utterly and eternally. 😛

Originally posted by Schecter

IT WAS A FRIKIN JOKE

anyway, if someone throws a guitar across a stage and calls it music, i say they are wrong. thats the point i was making. its mostly a gray area yet in some extreme cases its clear what is quality (creative and/or birthed by talent) music and what is not. remember rosanne barr singing the national anthem? not music imho.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I disagree with that statement...and to think you actually KNOW it's right is claiming quite a lot.

I think in terms of universal truths...and in terms of truths not ALWAYS being provable by fact. Some are...some aren't.

Some truths exists apart from facts proving them.

They're divine.

They're beyond.

They're unprovable.

They're not "AC is a male"...that's a fact.

Stop embarrassing yourself, you are wrong, say it.

Originally posted by Schecter
anyway, if someone throws a guitar across a stage and calls it music, i say they are wrong. thats the point i was making. its mostly a gray area yet in some extreme cases its clear what is quality (creative and/or birthed by talent) music and what is not. remember rosanne barr singing the national anthem? not music imho.

You made an irrelevant point though. That's like throwing a brick and calling it music. Nobody is suggesting nor debating, what constitutes MUSIC, but what is objectively good or BAD music, which doesn't exist.

If you throw a guitar on stage, some may like the sound, some may not, regardless of whether or not it's music. Those who like the sound and those who do not, are not wrong. You are too hung up on what is considered music, rather than skipping that part and focusing on whether it's possible or not for music in existence to be factually good or bad, which it isn't. Just the music produced.

-AC

Originally posted by Eis
D-Did you even read the second part of my post? I am quite sure I addressed that.

And from what I gather, all you're saying is that music that is missing some of those listed redeemable qualites, simply equals "music that is missing some of those listed redeemable qualites". It doesn't equal "bad music".

But my point is, informed opinions have learned from experience that music that is missing those qualities doesn't last, doesn't stand the test of time, and it seems to get an overwhelmingly negative reaction by other's who have these informed opinions.

So, if overhwelmingly negative reations to certain music by people with informed opinions aren't a sign of that music being bad...then what is?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You made an irrelevant point though. That's like throwing a brick and calling it music. Nobody is suggesting nor debating, what constitutes MUSIC, but what is objectively good or BAD music, which doesn't exist.

you're switching meanings between 'what is and isnt music' and 'what is good and bad music.' imho factually bad music isnt music at all and subjectively bad music is actual music (talent/technique....some remedial ability at least) whether or not many or most dislike it. thats been the point all along.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
If you throw a guitar on stage, some may like the sound, some may not, regardless of whether or not it's music. Those who like the sound and those who do not, are not wrong. You are too hung up on what is considered music, rather than skipping that part and focusing on what IS music, and whether it's possible or not for music in existence to be factually good or bad, which it isn't.

-AC

i never said that those who like the sound of a guitar thrown across the stage are wrong in liking it. i said they are wrong in calling it music. i already stated this. this is becoming irritating