Is all music created equal? (1 Viewer)

[matlock]

A friend of mine has developed an horrendous theory that the quality of all music can only be measured subjectively, and that there is therefore no such thing as good music. While it is true that beauty is in the eye (ear) of the beholder, I think it is possible to appreciate the quality of music without specifically being a fan.

For example, I know PJ Harvey is good, I know why she's good, but there's very little that she has produced that really interests me. Looking at the "Bands you should like but don't..." thread, this appears to be a common view. Actually maybe I should have posted this there.

Can it really be true that the music of M People is the equal of that of Yo La Tengo?

 

[billygannon]

It's like saying people are equal!

 

[Denny Oubidoux]

It's like saying people are equal!

exactly. I know that the music I like is better than the music that most other people like. As Wittgenstein would say, whether people choose to accept or ignore this is irrelevant.

 

[Richie]

I don't see why it's a 'horrendous' theory.. your friend is correct, if you're viewing things in a totally objective way. Liking music is based on complete subjectivity so there's no way to definately say something is 'good' or 'bad' once and for all (this is why using numerical ratings for music reviews, particularly if it's on a scale as fine as 1-100, is pretty stupid). The closest thing you could ever get to a completely objective rating would be to poll everybody alive and average the result. That said, people are almost never 100% objective when they talk about music, and it totally comes down to how much weight you give to particular opinions, so the theory doesn't really apply to reality..

 

[Doctor Muscles]

Let's just all agree that M-People are the ace-est band ever.

 

[matlock]

It's horrendous in the sense that I really don't want to believe it.

 

[quasiquasi]

Sorry, but YAAAAWWWN...

Next question: what is art?

 

[classic seanc]

Next question: what is art?

What is NOT art? oooooooooooooohhhh!!!!!


Really though, James Blunt (for example) is shit. No amount of analysis could ever prove that its as good as, lets say.......mozart. Sure music is largely subjective, but I think we can all agree that James Blunt is pants. It is possible to listen to different music objectively. If you have no particular attachment to that music, then why would you get subjective about it? For example, objectivly speaking, James Blunt is crap. y'see what I mean?

 

[cozy]

My theory is Chris de Burgh is dead and his god re-animated him as James Blunt. The legend lives on

 

[classic seanc]

I'd say you're right, objectivley speaking

 

[clonan attack]

except yellow music

 

[Franco]

some music is more equal than other muisc.

 

[snakybus]

That James Blunt was on the telly last night. Sure is posh. He'll never write a "Don't Pay The Ferryman" or a "Spanish Train". He'll never have the eyebrows for that.

 

[Osama Van Halen]

NO. IT IS NOT. I HAVE A THEORY THAT YOUZE ARE NOT LISTENING TO ENOUGH CLASSIC VAN HALEN. YOU'RE ALL USING THE MICROWAVE IN THE RYTHYM KITCHEN WHEN THERE'S A PERFECTLY AWESOME OVEN. OUR LADY OF PERPETUAL MOTION LOOKS DOWN AND COVERS HER EARS.
ALLAHQUANDO,
ALLAHQUANDO,
ALLAHQUANDO!!

 

[c0De_n1NjA]

quickly, everyone shut up.

 

[ratmonkey]

That James Blunt was on the telly last night. Sure is posh. He'll never write a "Don't Pay The Ferryman" or a "Spanish Train". He'll never have the eyebrows for that.

You're right there, can't see him doing any songs about Chiron any time soon.

 

[Lili Marlene]

Let's just all agree that M-People are the ace-est band ever.

Pfft, they're not even the best 'M' band ever

Ra-Ra-Rasputeen....