Is it possible to objectively judge music? (listening to music, alternative, genre)

cardboard adolescent · 09-27-2008, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog

you wreak of deconstructionism.

All you would need to do is set up criteria first one what would be up for judgment and how those scales would look. Its why academic papers generally start off with definitions of things, so as to allow the reader to know what your basing judgments on. So long as the criteria that serves as the basis for the judgment is standardized, there ought to be no problem with being able to judge things objectively.

yes, but which criteria you decide to set up is ultimately completely subjective so you're not much further along, are you?

you can play around with the criteria and definitions you use until you can prove any proposition, even "backstreet boy's christmas album is better than pet sounds"

~~Fyrenza~~ · 09-27-2008, 03:42 PM

its a paradox

it can and cant be objectively judged

subjectively
we can all agree that a concert pianist is playing better music than an 8 year old on a toy piano

but objectively
we all also agree that both are playing music

any judgements would have to be some of both

WaspStar · 09-27-2008, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fyrenza

its a paradox

it can and cant be objectively judged

subjectively
we can all agree that a concert pianist is playing better music than an 8 year old on a toy piano

but objectively
we all also agree that both are playing music

any judgements would have to be some of both

True, but I said in my original post that we're talking about pure "quality" here, not in terms of technical prowess or other such details.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad Stengel

2. The difference is how much music one is exposed to. I essentially have the same tastes, however, the amount of music Ive been exposed to changed it. Im not saying its BETTER than anyone elses-to me it is because my exposure has led to me discovering music thats better IMO. The point Im trying to make is that the amount of music people are exposed to tends to broaden their tastes, thus having a more informed opinion, thus having a larger influence over other tastes/more compatibility, which is viewed as "good taste" (again, Im NOT being egotistical-Im simply raising the point that those exposed to more music tend to be compatible with more music listeners)
Might I also add that In no way do I consider my tastes broad, Im simply trying to play devils advocate.

I see what you're getting at (and I don't think you're being egotistical), and I think experience/broad taste can certainly help you in reccomending music to other people ("You like artist A and artist B? Then you'll love artist C"), but that's not the same as objective judgment.

I think most people will agree that they refine their ideas of what is "good" as they hear more music, but I think that's just another way to support the idea that music can never be objectively judged in terms of its aesthetic quality.

Minstrel · 09-27-2008, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad Stengel

Lets put it this way: A 13 year old girl who's favorite artist is Miley Cyrus gives you an opinion on an album you dont know if you'd like or not, versus someone in his 30's that owns thousands of albums, and has very informed opinions on music, even if he doesnt have the exact same taste as you. Whos opinion would you take more seriously

It depends on which one is closer to you in taste. If you feel that the "obvious" answer is the 30 year old, that just suggests that you identify more closely with that person. It's not a question of the 30 year old having a more objectively excellent opinion, it's a question of who's taste is more likely to be predictive of yours.

Speaking to popularity, I felt the whole Pepsi "taste test" ads were fairly stupid. If I like Coke better (hypothetically), what relevance does it have if every other human on Earth thinks Pepsi tastes better? When it comes to opinion, popularity is really quite irrelevant.

WaspStar · 09-28-2008, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minstrel

It depends on which one is closer to you in taste. If you feel that the "obvious" answer is the 30 year old, that just suggests that you identify more closely with that person. It's not a question of the 30 year old having a more objectively excellent opinion, it's a question of who's taste is more likely to be predictive of yours.

Speaking to popularity, I felt the whole Pepsi "taste test" ads were fairly stupid. If I like Coke better (hypothetically), what relevance does it have if every other human on Earth thinks Pepsi tastes better? When it comes to opinion, popularity is really quite irrelevant.

Exactly! We tend to value someone's opinions more if we can relate to that person; it has nothing to do with popularity or objective value.

insinkerator · 09-28-2008, 11:03 AM

i like to think that i can listen to music and recognise it as wehter it would be good or not within its genre....if thats what you mean...

Brad Stengel · 09-28-2008, 01:31 PM

The other thing to consider is: If music really is completely subjective, why then on this forum are groups frequently referred to as inferior/bad. For example, if everyone truly believed it was all subjective, would those two new grunge kids get any crap? Maybe some, but any musical discussion would be, "Well, I guess its just a matter of taste if you think Mudhoney is far superior to Dinosaur Jr.", instead of, "Are you fucking serious?!?!"

Its another big point Im trying to make, in a discussion like this its much easier to argue that no music is really better, its all a matter of taste-but this is rarely practiced by anyone, here, or anywhere.

swim · 09-28-2008, 02:48 PM

Objectively judging music sounds really boring.

cardboard adolescent · 09-28-2008, 03:22 PM

^^ true dat

~~Fyrenza~~ · 09-28-2008, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swim

Objectively judging music sounds really boring.

boring and hard since it doesnt seem possible

i could never do it

i dont listen to music i dont like
theres 2 much other music i DO like out there

09-28-2008, 11:03 AM	#36 (permalink)
insinkerator Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: IRELAND Posts: 95	i like to think that i can listen to music and recognise it as wehter it would be good or not within its genre....if thats what you mean... __________________ my band my blog my last fm my music collection

09-28-2008, 01:31 PM	#37 (permalink)
Brad Stengel This Space for Rent Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 815	The other thing to consider is: If music really is completely subjective, why then on this forum are groups frequently referred to as inferior/bad. For example, if everyone truly believed it was all subjective, would those two new grunge kids get any crap? Maybe some, but any musical discussion would be, "Well, I guess its just a matter of taste if you think Mudhoney is far superior to Dinosaur Jr.", instead of, "Are you fucking serious?!?!" Its another big point Im trying to make, in a discussion like this its much easier to argue that no music is really better, its all a matter of taste-but this is rarely practiced by anyone, here, or anywhere. __________________ These is the musics I own: http://rateyourmusic.com/collection/BradStengel/oo

09-28-2008, 02:48 PM	#38 (permalink)
swim dontcareaboutyou Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: North Carolina Posts: 5,188	Objectively judging music sounds really boring. __________________ http://nakednaps.bandcamp.com/

09-27-2008, 03:42 PM	#32 (permalink)
~~Fyrenza~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: high above the Republic of Texas Posts: 216	its a paradox it can and cant be objectively judged subjectively we can all agree that a concert pianist is playing better music than an 8 year old on a toy piano but objectively we all also agree that both are playing music any judgements would have to be some of both

09-28-2008, 03:22 PM	#39 (permalink)
cardboard adolescent ;) Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: CA Posts: 3,503	^^ true dat