WaspStar

That is, the quality of the music. Is there any way to ascertain that Revolver is better than Blonde On Blonde (or not)?


I tend to think not. Apart from popularity (sales, polls, etc) and influence, I don't think there's any inherent "quality" to music. Even though you'd have to be crazy to prefer Cut The Crap to The Clash, there's no way to prove you "wrong" should you hold that particular opinion.

__________________
"This sure doesn't look like 'Crazy Ernie's Amazing Emporium of Total Bargain Madness!'"

RockGuitar101

No, and the reason is everyone has thier own hero's

Son of JayJamJah

yes, but not until you're mentally mature

__________________
Me, Myself and I United as One

If you're posting in the music forums make sure to be thoughtful and expressive, if you're posting in the lounge ask yourself "is this something that adds to the conversation?" It's important to remember that a lot of people use each thread. You're probably not as funny or clever as you think, I know I'm not.

My Van Morrison Discography Thread

Blackbird

Hard to tell ... I mean everyone is at least a little partial to a particular genre, and it's hard to sit and listen to the quality of something you hate. It's possible though ... You'd have to take a step back and just listen to every instrument and then the song as a whole. It'd be possible, but It'd be hard.

__________________
Make it last, cause forevers often get cut short.

Zombeels

Yes you can but you have to define the criteria you're using when judging an artist objectively. It's quite clear the band Yes are better musicians than the Sex Pistols but people may be looking at power, raw energy, attitude, rebelliousness and a host of other sets of criteria when judging these two bands against each other.

__________________
What It Is

anticipation

it's impossible to objectively judge anything.

TheBig3

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.

__________________
I've moved to a new address

Fyrenza

ive wondered about this 2

i generally turn on the 'now playing' option on windows media player and i have the 'music colors' -- 'colors in motion' visualization selected

ive wondered if i could tell if i would like a song just by the way the patterns of that visualization flowed

i was admittedly high at the time

i agree with Blackbird -- i cant do screammo or noise so my judgement of that type of music would be quite shallow as its damn near impossible to listen to something while trying not to hear any of it

and anticipation -- not because im into deconstructionism but because its awful hard to get everyone on the same page even as far as what the basic definitions are since everything is up for interpretation

the short answer = Nah

anticipation

*reek

wouldn't the definitions in themselves be subjective of those who define them? the standardization of someone's subjective opinion on what criteria to include and what to omit would not remove the fact that a living person made choices based on some sort of belief, whether knowingly or not.

TheBig3

The definitions can be subjective. By putting them forward you can objectivly judge the music based on criteria.

This is like the whole vetting the vetters thing. If you agree that item X will be considered valued and then define how the rankings will go, you can do it. Its more about making it known how results were achieved and not declaring things to be the best song ever by secret workings behind the scenes.

__________________
I've moved to a new address