The Official "Music Was So Much Better in the Glorious Days of Yore" Thread

[rostasi]

Originally Posted by Mucha na Dziko

I don't believe that. I think you can "measure" objectively the quality of any art really.
The parameters being innovation in songwriting or production techniques, the complexity (or if lack there of "idea" or "invention") of the music and so on.

Taste is subjective, quality is not. One might like listening to Rihanna more than to the Beatles, but no one can say that Rihanna "makes" better, richer, etc music.
I think it's important to be able to distinguish taste from quality, and I'm not sure why most people aren't capable of that.

What is the “standard” for “innovation”? What is the “standard” for “production technique”? Who’s the person setting the “standards” for “complexity”, “idea” or “invention”? There are lots of people who can, and do, say that Rihanna makes (why the quotation marks) “better, richer, etc<sic>“ music.

[Mucha na Dziko]

Originally Posted by rostasi

(why the quotation marks)

Because She is the one performing the vocals, but not actually writing the music or lyrics, or performing the music itself

[Mucha na Dziko]

Originally Posted by rostasi

What is the “standard” for “innovation”? What is the “standard” for “production technique”? Who’s the person setting the “standards” for “complexity”, “idea” or “invention”? .

I kinda feel like you’re arguing here for the sake of argument, or that you’ve been somewhat offended by my comment.

Innovation in songwriting and production techniques is creating new wąsy, possibilities, etc, that other people then start to use. Like a certain chord progression, or playing a tape in reverse, or whatever

Complexity is when the music in question is not created out of cliché chord progresions, or simple 3-4 chords patterns, or not out of chords that you learn when you first pick up an instrument. Et cætra
If your music is based on cliché progressions, 3 chords, or basic chords, then what you need is the „idea” (your own „invention”) for innovation, so these simple patterns seem new and interesting.

What was the point of asking these things?

[rostasi]

Originally Posted by Mucha na Dziko

I kinda feel like you’re arguing here for the sake of argument, or that you’ve been somewhat offended by my comment.

Innovation in songwriting and production techniques is creating new wąsy, possibilities, etc, that other people then start to use. Like a certain chord progression, or playing a tape in reverse, or whatever

Complexity is when the music in question is not created out of cliché chord progresions, or simple 3-4 chords patterns, or not out of chords that you learn when you first pick up an instrument. Et cætra
If your music is based on cliché progressions, 3 chords, or basic chords, then what you need is the „idea” (your own „invention”) for innovation, so these simple patterns seem new and interesting.

What was the point of asking these things?

Asking you twice what your parameters are is not arguing or being offended. Also, I find it interesting that after you finally gave an answer, you then asked what the point was of asking. It was to get an answer. Simple.

[Mucha na Dziko]

Originally Posted by rostasi

Asking you twice what your parameters are is not arguing or being offended. Also, I find it interesting that after you finally gave an answer, you then asked what the point was of asking. It was to get an answer. Simple.

Questioning the meaning of parameters is arguing.
And as when reading on the internet it’s harder to know what was the intention/emotion of the person you’re Talking to, I assumed (purely out of your words) that you might feel offended of some sorts. And I wanted to point that out in order to make clear, that that was not my intention

Simple.

[rostasi]

Originally Posted by Mucha na Dziko

Questioning the meaning of parameters is arguing.

I didn’t question the meaning of parameters. You really are reading too much into this. I just simply asked you to define your parameters.