|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
View Poll Results: Which is worse? | |||
Banality, contrivance, cliché or sentimentality (etc.) | 18 | 69.23% | |
Abstraction, dissonance, "cacophony" or abrasiveness (etc.) | 8 | 30.77% | |
Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
10-28-2016, 04:05 PM | #1 (permalink) |
???pp? ??snW
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NO
Posts: 686
|
What kind of music do you find most unappealing?
Just a little poll I wanted to post purely out of curiosity. It'd be interesting to see how the results are distributed among users on the site.
The question is: If you had to pick one of the two general categories, which kind of qualities would you say has the most probability to put you off towards a given piece of music?: a) Banality, contrivance, cliché or sentimentality (etc.) b) Abstraction, dissonance, "cacophony" or abrasiveness (etc.) edit: Or differently put; which one annoys you most, if at all? /edit Feel free to explain your preference, but no there's no obligation to do so. The poll choices will be public. Last edited by GD; 10-28-2016 at 05:11 PM. |
10-28-2016, 04:12 PM | #2 (permalink) |
SOPHIE FOREVER
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 35,541
|
I chose the first option (shocker).
When I looked at the thread title, I was thinking passionless music would be my answer. I guess that falls into the the first category since lack of passion and effort can push you towards cliches; there's a lot of abstract/dissonant music that fits that bill though. Familiarity is nice, but so are surprises, and the second category just has a greater amount of good music under it.
__________________
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth. |
10-28-2016, 04:27 PM | #4 (permalink) | ||
???pp? ??snW
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NO
Posts: 686
|
Quote:
A follow-up question to the users (like me) who choose the first option: Would you agree that an experienced listener who has explored a wide range of music will generally tend to pick option a)? Quote:
Last edited by GD; 10-28-2016 at 04:33 PM. |
||
10-28-2016, 04:31 PM | #5 (permalink) |
SOPHIE FOREVER
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 35,541
|
One thing to note is that I don't consider abstraction or dissonance to be negatives, but all of the words you used for the first category would be words I use to negatively describe music.
__________________
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth. |
10-28-2016, 04:34 PM | #7 (permalink) |
SOPHIE FOREVER
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: East of the Southern North American West
Posts: 35,541
|
It's more likely, but I don't think it's a general rule since exploring things doesn't mean enjoying, appreciating, or understanding them. Plus, there are still people who will explore and keep an open mind but at the same time don't want to remain exploring and have a niche that they stay comfortably in. So in short: kinda.
__________________
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth. |
10-28-2016, 04:48 PM | #8 (permalink) | |
???pp? ??snW
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NO
Posts: 686
|
Quote:
For future voters, keep in mind that I'm not thinking about something like distorted guitars or "heaviness" when I say abrasive, but full on chaos, atonality/pantonality or altogether rejection of recognizable pitches and such. Also, off-key singing and very loose/amateurish-sounding stuff like f.ex. The Shaggs could possibly also fit into category b). edit: It's also worth noting that although the two categories are not mutually exclusive in all cases, I feel the overlap is fairly negligible. You could argue that one option having more apparently subjective terms will skew the poll in favor of the first option, but I honestly couldn't find any good objective descriptors to box in the kind of music I had in mind. Although few will probably admit to preferring "contrived" music, maybe they would if they absolutely couldn't stand the latter option... Last edited by GD; 10-28-2016 at 05:05 PM. |
|
10-28-2016, 11:19 PM | #9 (permalink) | |||
Music Addict
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: The Organized Mind
Posts: 2,044
|
I'm principally perturbed by pretty people performing a pastiche of popular puppet performances to placate the plebian peasantry.
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
10-29-2016, 12:36 AM | #10 (permalink) | |
carpe musicam
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Les Barricades Mystérieuses
Posts: 7,710
|
The genre I find unappealing is Heavy Metal, mostly the sub-sub-genres of Metal. Not the early bands that made up "heavy music" (as Dunn put it), e.g. Deep Purple, Iron Butterfly, Zeppelin & Sabbath. Most Metal bands fall under the first option i.e. Banality, contrivance, and cliché but not sentimentality. There is no sentimentality in Metal, unless it's some Hair Metal power ballad, but those can be incredibly cheesy that it negates any sentimentality by being so unbearably contrived.
__________________
Quote:
"it counts in our hearts" ?ºº? “I have nothing to offer anybody, except my own confusion.” Jack Kerouac. “If one listens to the wrong kind of music, he will become the wrong kind of person.” Aristotle. "If you tried to give Rock and Roll another name, you might call it 'Chuck Berry'." John Lennon "I look for ambiguity when I'm writing because life is ambiguous." Keith Richards |
|
|