Quote:
Originally Posted by Trollheart
Vengangelica
The rest of us are not saying that there is or has never been a long song with which we became bored. As I mentioned in my last post, it has happened to me, infrequently. Sorry for bolding the next part but it is important and neither of you seem to be understanding when I say it so:
The difference is that listening to a long song, which becomes boring or which I don't like, does not make me think, or put me in a frame of mind where I think that ALL long songs are therefore boring.
THIS is the point you're both missing. Of course things can become boring if overstretched. An overlong film can meander ("The matrix revolutions" sagged for me in the middle) as can a book that's too long or not enjoyable enough, and the other one you mentioned, well that's just silly. Eating twenty scoops of ice cream would make you feel sick, not bored. But yeah, the principle remains. I wouldn't have another 20 scoops of ice cream again after that, but only because I wouldn't want to be sick, not because I was bored.
Your point and examples there start to get a little muddy, but the important thing to understand is that we, the vast majority of us, don't make a draconian judgement based on a bad experience. So if we don't like a long song, okay we dont like it. No-one's saying that they like EVERY song they listen to. [...]
Maybe it's not true to say the length doesn't matter to me: personally, I prefer longer songs, though if the song is not good then a longer version of it will (probably) not make it better, though it has happened. Look at U2's "Bad", benefited from being extended. Just one example. Another is Thin LIzzy's "Still in love with you".
Anyway, the thing none of us here can understand is not that wisdom does not like long songs --- anyone is entitled to their opinion and preference --- but that the length of the song is a direct barometer for whether they listen to the song or not. None of us here would look at a song by an artiste we have never heard from, and check the length: it's just not important, unless maybe we're in a hurry, on the way to bed, tired or whatever.
So THAT's what we can't understand: that the length of a song stops wisdom from even trying it.
(will someone please let me know if wisdom is male or female so I can stop using these alternative pronouns?)
Just tell me, really, do you support the belief that if you hear a long song you don't like, or several, that you stop listening to all long songs purely on that basis?
|
(I think wisdom is male based on what he has said of himself, Trollheart.
)
Until now, what I have heard people in this thread say (with the exception of wisdom and myself) is that they like and
would like a song regardless of length: length is not a factor in their preferences. Thank you, Trollheart, for acknowledging that maybe it's not true to say that song length doesn't matter to you.
I don't recall wisdom's stating that he expects ALL long songs to be boring based on the fact that he has disliked many more long songs than short ones.
Wisdom's description of how he views long songs sounds identical to mine: based on my experiences of listening to music, when a new song I have never heard before is longer than 6 minutes, then I think the odds are higher that I will find the song to be boring, repetitive, or meandering such that I will be less likely to enjoy the song compared to a shorter one.
Trollheart, you asked,
"Do you support the belief that if you hear a long song you don't like, or several, that you stop listening to all long songs purely on that basis?"
My answer is: Yes. A person's method of choosing music does not matter to me. If she wants to avoid all songs longer than 6 minutes due to having heard one or three long songs that she didn't like, then that's fine with me. I trust that she will be the best one to judge what listening method to use to bring herself musical enjoyment.
Note, however, that wisdom has never said he
always rejects long songs outright due to having heard just several long songs.
Wisdom also explained that song length isn't the
only criterion he uses to decide whether to listen to a song or predict whether he'll like it, but song length is one criterion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisdom
Time alone isn't the deciding factor. That's a strange conclusion from some readers. It is a cheat I use based on experience, that's all [...].
|
Like wisdom, I will probably listen to the beginnings of many different songs, even long ones.
However, when I decide what music to listen to, I sometimes reject listening to an entire song simply because of its length (especially if the length combines with my dislike of the genre or the artist's other music I have heard).
Why? Wisdom explains...
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisdom
Realistically, everyone needs limits. There is plenty of good music in this world - leaving out categories one tends not to like allows more enjoyment for the proven stuff.
|
And I agree. If I have nine minutes to listen to music and can either listen to one piece that lasts nine minutes, or three shorter pieces lasting three minutes each, then I will almost always choose the three shorter pieces and not listen to the long one (or will only "taste" it for a minute), especially if those pieces are in genres I prefer...
...that is, unless I've been staring into your eyes too long, have become hypnotized, and listen to the long song instead!
* * * * * *
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisdom
"Banter" has a connotation of friendly.
|
Yes it does, doesn't it.
* * * * * *
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanilla
First of all tl;dr. Second of all if that is the dismal amount of songs you have listened too then you really can't say you are that knowledgeable about music. I've also noticed your tastes are limited too power metal and you avoid reaching out to more diverse music of all genres. My advice to you is to stop repeating the same droll opinions and get some more experience.
|
Drawing inferences based on the songs one has heard, regardless of the number, is a reasonable way to start making sense for oneself of the vast array of songs in existence so that one can choose what to listen to next.
All conclusions about music can be refined over time through listening to more songs, but there is no set number of songs one must hear before one can say one's conclusions are "correct." Even someone who has drawn conclusions about music after listening to 100,000 unique songs might find those conclusions contradicted by the next 300,000 songs he hears.
The idea that a person should wait to offer an opinion on MusicBanter until having listened to some (undefined) number of songs sounds very elitist to me.
* * * * * *
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rjinnx
The thing is, there is such thing as opinionated statements. Something that is this or that is subjective. But there should always be a reason behind it. I always thought those statements being an opinion is a given, so I don't see where the necessity is to state it. Example: "Dio is a lousy singer." A clear questionable response would be "Why do you think so?". Indicating a belief or idea coming from thought. I really don't see the problem here.
|
I agree with you that when a person says, "Such and such is horrible," I assume this is her opinion and she is not saying her view is an objective fact that should be true for all people.
For example, if wisdom *does* believe that long songs are inherently flawed because of their length (despite evidence that some people like the songs, which contradicts the notion that the songs have inherent "flaws" preventing all people from liking them), that would be interesting to learn...but until he specifically says that, I don't assume.