Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
What tools do you speak of that measure this frequency?
A guitar tuner is one. It measures the frequency your string is vibrating at and compares it to the agreed upon standard for what "E" is (or A or G or whichever string you're tuning). Then it tells you if you're sharp, flat, or what have you.
And why don't people find emotion expressed through music appealing, and just the frequencies?
It's a matter of how you interpret the frequencies. Not the frequencies themselves.
The music exists...just like a joke might exist before the peron has ever ever told it or written it down. And even at that state, I say that music can possibly be crap.
Not the best analogy. What constitues a joke is a matter of opinion as well. Ultimately language itself is just a series of sounds arranged in certain ways.
-------------------------------
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Why is that even necessary to this thread?
Am I breaking the rules by having this discussion here?
Does it matter that much to you?
Originally posted by Ytse
A guitar tuner is one. It measures the frequency your string is vibrating at and compares it to the agreed upon standard for what "E" is (or A or G or whichever string you're tuning). Then it tells you if you're sharp, flat, or what have you.
Yeah...that's also what I was basically saying regarding wrong notes. If it says C in the written notation, and someone plays or sings C#...then that can be measured, yes.
Originally posted by Ytse
It's a matter of how you interpret the frequencies. Not the frequencies themselves.
Originally posted by YtseNo you're not...he does this all the time.
Am I breaking the rules by having this discussion here?
What you're doing, Ytse, is allowing him to weasel out of what the actual debate is, and if he's going to continue bumping this thread, I'd rather we keep it on topic.
He needs someone like you to let him escape the focus of the debate, and you're falling for it, hence why he keeps dodging me.
So, forget technicalities, that's not what's being discussed.
An objective standard of good or bad music; that's the topic.
-AC
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Yeah...that's also what I was basically saying regarding wrong notes. If it says C in the written notation, and someone plays or sings C#...then that can be measured, yes.
Yes, but being C or C# isn't a property of the sound itself. It's an interpretation. For example, before the first note was conceived, even before the measurement system itself was around there existed sound enegry which vibrated at a frequency which would later be measured at 440Hz. Today that frequency is known as A above middle-C.
It's just a way of arranging sound.
Music trancends "sound" though.
Music cannot exist entirely apart from sound. Even if you had someone who was deaf from birth and learned how to compose simply by studying music theory and composers like Mozart, Bach, etc. The notes he writes down represent something. It's represents certain frequencies of sounds or, no sound at all (rests). As a whole this arrangement could be called music.
Funny, I said the same thing when you vanished from the music forum (But not KMC.) for a week after dodging our requests.
If you can't contribute to the thread, leave, simple request.
Stop being a hypocrite.
What has Bardock got to do anyway? What are you waiting on? Him to say "I agree with AC."? He already has. You're an ignorant mug.
-AC
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
OMG. This is incredible.YOU'VE SAID THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GOOD OR BAD MUSIC...therefore...NO CRITERIA FOR GOOD AND BAD MUSIC...BECAUSE THERE'S NOOOOO SUUUUCH THIIIING!!!!!!!
THAT'S what YOU said...that's not what he said. THIS is what he said...
Come on Bardock...I know you can do it...
Yes, there is no criteria for absolute criteria for good or bad music. I would not deny this. There can be subjective criteria obviously.
Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Where's Bardock42?Looks like he's jumped ship.
I wonder why?
Hmmmm...
I was out getting some food then I watched Ghost Rider, alright movie, despite me despising Nicholas Cage.
I just thought I'd post this from the other thread, just 'cause it's...oh...kinda neat...
It started with me pretending I love Creed...
---
Regarding Creed....thank you...thank you...and thank you.
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I think they're shit, music's objective and all that so they are shit. Definitely.
Originally posted by Solo
Good one.
Originally posted by manorastroman
don't stop now. you are riffing, man. i mean, you are ON A ROLL.
Creed are one of my all time most hated bands...I despise every note, word and sound that comes out of this group. They are horrible in a countless number of ways.
But...I don't think that's what you guys meant...because you're just saying you personally don't like them and that they really don't appeal to you in the slightest...not that they're actually bad...'cause there's no such thing as that right?
Anyways...
...thank you for helping me once and for all prove my point...
...thank you for admitting in front of everyone that you don't "actually" think Creed are "actually" bad, but that they simply don't "do it" for you and that's all...
...and finally, thank you for proving to everyone on this board that when you say "Creed sucks" it means absolutley nothing...because it's just your opinion...and you could be wrong...so then Creed might not suck.
That's right people...Creed don't suck. Whatever you say chillmeistergen, Solo, and manorastroman. You really know what's up.
And btw...I'm only GUESSING chillmeistergen knows he's actually onto something by what he said...but judging from his past comments, I doubt it...so that's why I had to group him in with the rest...
...the rest being everybody else you isn't actually saying anything more than "This band really doesn't appeal to me" when they make a statement such as "Creed sucks"...'cause that's all their "logic" allows them to do.
Isn't that wonderful?