riseagainstrocks

How am I trying to be cool? I'm pointing out that you simply don't have to background to discuss things on this level. You can find Cynic boring if you want. I really don't understand how. Nor does the vast majority of those with a musical education.

and jackhammer I don't see how I went on a tangent. You said that modern music is built off the blues. I agree. However since the origin of this whole discussion was my assertion that emotion in music can only truly carry the weight it was meant to for the writer only, I felt compelled to give my reasoning and then state how your logic did not apply to what I was talking about.

I'll relate this to another medium of art; painting. If a painter painted exactly with emotion, odds are you'd end up with something Pollack-ish. However, if time went into the planning, composition, study, and technique of the painting, you'd end up with some Rembrandt-ish.

Emotion in music is a fine starting place, but with out real ability, it's worthless

and just to clarify, when I use the term technical, I'm not talking about mile a minute sweeps. That Cynic video is a prime example. Odd chord shapes coupled with counterpoint vocal melody create a layered effect that appeals to me in the pure aesthetic sense as well as the mathematical one.

__________________
One note timeless, came out of nowhere...

Urban Hat€monger ?

I wasn't aware that people needed a degree in music to discuss it. If I was to go out & get one it wouldn't make me go out and become a fan of Cynic because that type of music does nothing for me. It might help me understand why YOU think they're good , but I already know why you think they're good because you've just said so below.

But both are equally sought after

From a technical standpoint it is. Personally i'm much more interested in the the message behind it & how it's expressed. I am much more interested in people and their experiences and stories than if someones nailed a chord properly.

And there's nothing wrong with that , but to me all those things are just window dressing to a song that deep down has very little substance.

__________________

Lizzie

What on earth are you listening to??
Music is Emotion!!! If you dont have emotion, you simply dont have music, and it doesnt matter how great you are, or how much techniqal skills you have, emotion is a nessetate, or else your simply listening to notes being played

__________________
white and black, are you looking for the sun boy?
the sun doesn't shine down here, no, not in the shadow

ProggyMan

I agree with you to an extent, but how else do you define music besides (On a simplistic level) notes being played?

Seltzer

Are you asking how you quantify emotion or other elements of music, because that isn't really possible? However, I consider the major elements of music to be emotion, atmosphere and hooks.

There are many other elements like groove, heavyness etc... but they're more minor and some of them are more causal than others.

__________________

NoiseNotMusic

nah. look at punk rock. I don't mean bull**** punk i mean actual DIY punk.

__________________
http://imagegen.last.fm/basicrt10/re...AmNietzche.gif

Rainard Jalen

Um... because people have different tastes? Because one person will relate/engage more with one type of sound than another? Because it's all subjective at the end of the day?

There's nothing in Cynic's entire catalogue that's compositionally superior to even the Tellytubbies theme tune. More complex/arty does not equate to superior. That's a fallacy if ever there was one. Neither does it equate to "more musical". More musical? That doesn't even mean anything. "Musicality" is not scalic, for heaven's sake. Sure, you can invent your own definition of what qualifies as musical or "more musical", or you can follow somebody else's, but it all means jack. It's a moot term. You're entitled to your viewpoint, but it's no more weighty than anybody else's.

Inuzuka Skysword

Why is taste the way you grade music? I mean, hell, tell me who Cynic ripped off to be unoriginal because I can't find it. Since music is an art I am going to grade it in an artsy way because that is obviously how you grade art, is it not? I mean I am not against taste at all and taste is a gift because without it we would not "get into" certain genres, but you cross the line when you say music is bad because you don't like to listen to it at the time. See, what if you were to like Cynic later in your life. I mean you would love them, but because of what you said earlier in your life you cannot say they are good. See the problem with grading by taste? It changes by the mood. Now if you look at the originality of a band, then you will be able to appreciate music much more.

Rainard Jalen

But that's the whole point. There's no objective criteria for "grading art". If no common ground can be agreed upon, it's effectively meaningless. It's all down to personal taste and interpretation at the end of the day. Take a set of lyrics. To one person, it may be profound - to another, pretentious. Or a melody: to one person exciting, to another, saccharine and sickly. Or a riff: to one person, complex and deep; to another, wooden, plastic, over-calculated, soulless. You can never say that one piece of art is better than another, except going by one's own personal criteria. Which is no more valid than anybody else's.

One of the things you mentioned was originality. To me, originality to a degree is important, yes. In that way, my own personal criteria matches yours. A lot of people don't place any importance in that sort of thing, though.


To riseagainstrocks: I had assumed you were ridiculing, marginalizing and scorning a number of other genres. If not, then my bad. Sorry.

The Unfan

I forgot to hit the quote button so pardon my slight paraphrase there.

Well thought out intricate sound without meaning to the listener is just well thought out intricate sound. If the listener can't relate to the song, no matter how complex or how much technical talent is put forth into the creation of said song, than why should the listener enjoy it? I know the reason I like music is because I can relate to the thought or emotion expressed therein. I like Vai's music not because he plays over the top stuff, but because it has a certain feel to it that I can often relate to. Same goes for Cynic's sound, sometimes I just like a calculated yet delicate form of anger. A very honest form of emotive expression. Does that mean I don't like simplistic music sometimes? Of course not.

What makes music good is genuinely grasping the expression, even if grasping the expression is admiring the wanktarded musicianship it is still something you personally understand and relate to, or just an honest being entertained by. Same goes for all art.

I find that I don't like Superman as a character because he represents things I'm not personally, and I often find I'm against his stances. He often expresses a sort of conservative idea of objective morality. On the other hand Batman has a sort of badass act upon feelings vibe going, a sort of chaotic vigilante justice thing. The honesty of Batman's mournful losses makes him easily relatexd to and I think I can more honestly empathize with Batman. See how that works? Superman may technically represent the Super-Hero genre more purely, but Batman has more character. My favorite super-hero is actually Iron-Man. His raging alcoholic tendencies makes him seem so human and likeable. Point? No matter the medium of art, what makes it good is going to be something personal, not something set in stone.

You find technical prowess to either be relatable (doubtful) or entertaining. Some just don't.