Eminem - Revival

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by elphenor

that's not the assumption you accused me of

which was more like "no one with good tastes could like something popular"

That's your basic implication. It's more like they can't like something poppy, or simple. According to your assumptions. And that popular music is made to be that way. And you think it follows more of a formula than your music. You've implied that many times too.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

You mad bro? Why is it hard to accept the truth? Do you NEED to believe that popularity has no merit at all because they CAN have fans that don't reach your standard of art appreciation?

Are you reading my posts? Again: Popularity is neither here nor there unless you go deeper with it at which point it's too surface level to even bring up.

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by Frownland

Are you reading my posts? Popularity is neither here nor there unless you go deeper with it.

Yeah, and I agreed with that. The biggest question would be why is it popular? Initially, if something retains popularity, it has a good reason why. I think we both agree. And it's useless to bring up in personal opinions, we both agree.

Okay, but where you get lost is where I disagree with popular opinions being almost meaningless because you think certain types of fans are musical morons for not living up to your standard of musical appreciation. And you think they can make big enough of a bulk of any fan base to completely dismiss it.

Edit: And I think that statement tries to make it objective and if you want to make it objective I think musical opinion belongs to the masses. Maybe not on something as easily measured as technical ability or something like that, but just on the basic idea of what is good music.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

Yeah, and I agreed with that. The biggest question would be why is it popular? Initially, if something retains popularity, it has a good reason why. I think we both agree. And it's useless to bring up in personal opinions, we both agree.

I still wouldn't say that the bolded is true, that's just a straight up fallacy. I can't get behind that. There's a degree of truth to the amount of people liking an artist, but like I said: you have to go deeper than popularity if you're going to be using it as a source of validation.

Okay, but where you get lost is where I disagree with popular opinions being almost meaningless because you think certain types of fans are musical morons for not living up to your standard of musical appreciation. And you think they can make big enough of a bulk of any fan base to completely dismiss it.

Nope. Popularity has been awarded to a wide variety of artists for a wide variety of reasons, which means that it is not consistent across artists...are you reading my posts? It's useful as a sidenote and a sidenote only. If you value it differently, don't impose that dumb **** on me. Give me actual qualities of the music if you want to go toe to toe about an album. Your buddies don't know ****. I mean have you met people? They're ****ing idiots. I prefer my idiotic thoughts to theirs any day and you're an idiot if you don't think the same about your own opinions.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

Edit: And I think that statement tries to make it objective and if you want to make it objective I think musical opinion belongs to the masses. Maybe not on something as easily measured as technical ability or something like that, but just on the basic idea of what is good music.

Do you also feel this way about science?

I stopped talking about Eminiem a long time ago btw.

[[MERIT]]

How 'bout that Eminem kid and his music, huh?

[Frownland]

He used to spit but I think he's just kinda there production-wise. Haven't listened to his latest.

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by Frownland

Do you also feel this way about science?

I stopped talking about Eminiem a long time ago btw.

No, like I said, with something as subjective as art appreciation, I think the masses control the objective view on it. Science is not subjective.

Popularity has never been consistently awarded to an artist for a silly reason. There is always a reason with merit behind why an artist has retained popularity. I think artists have created the illusion of popularity, which isn't really popularity. It's like Nickelback. Now they are a huge band, they have tons of fans, they are mainstream, they seem to be popular, but the popular opinion is actually that they are terrible. 9/10 people will say they are trash. Or award shows. They tend to make artists look more popular than they actually are.

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by [MERIT]

How 'bout that Eminem kid and his music, huh?

It's important for me to get my point across.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

No, like I said, with something as subjective as art appreciation, I think the masses control the objective view on it. Science is not subjective.

And music is subjective, so why are we trying to approach it objectively

But if we were to approach music objectively, it would make more sense to establish the guidelines for whatever you think that artist is great. Establish a premise.

Popularity has never been consistently awarded to an artist for a silly reason.

There is always a reason with merit behind why an artist has retained popularity. I think artists have created the illusion of popularity, which isn't really popularity. It's like Nickelback. Now they are a huge band, they have tons of fans, they are mainstream, they seem to be popular, but the popular opinion is actually that they are terrible. 9/10 people will say they are trash. Or award shows. They tend to make artists look more popular than they actually are.

This is what I was referring to when I said going beyond popularity. Nickelback is popular in that they have album sales, but the consensus (which we established is different from popularity) is that they're watered down ****.