User Tag List

First 910111213 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 121

  1. #101
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    I don't know what to say. It doesn't make an impact on me.

    How loud do you play your music?
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  2. #102
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    How loud do you play your music?
    Too loud.

  3. #103
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    Too loud.

    If it's too loud, you're too old!
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  4. #104
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    If it's too loud, you're too old!
    It's bad for my hearing for sure.

  5. #105
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    I just listened to The Bends again.

    I didn't even notice when "Just" was on.
    I mean, if you don't enjoy that album/Radiohead in general, then fair enough. I can't tell you what to like or dislike.

    And though I'm 99.9% sure you don't care to hear it, I can give you lots of theoretical reasons that "Just" (along with almost every track on that album) are really interesting innovations in the fields of songwriting and production.

    In other words, you may not like it, which is fair enough, but based on a number of factors chances are it's probably good.


    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    But taste in music has no objectivity. Was is considered good is entirely in the mind, and in every mind it is different. And no one, you included, actually has a rational explanation for why you like any music at all. Response to music is inately irrational.

    But I think you're right, there isn't a way to argue that the Beatles are better than the Backstreet Boys, and it does become a bunch of people shrieking about biases. That's why I think it's a waste of time.

    If I argued about who demonstrated more skill, then yeah, I could try to make an objective argument. But that's not the same as saying someone made music I like.
    Sorry dude, but merc is 100% right here.

    When you say "demonstrated more skill", you have to be careful because "skill" means a lot of different things and most non-musicians are inclined to interpret it as "skill=technical chops", which is ridiculous. If that were the case, Yngwie Malmsteen would be universally considered the greatest guitarist of all time, which is stupid.

    In terms of music critique, "skill" doesn't refer to technical playing chops or to emotional impact on particular people, but rather to how the artist compares to other artists in similar genres from the same time period. The context is EVERYTHING.

    Many NP types have trouble evaluating music according to the contextual standard in which it was conceived/created. Since Ne refuses to accept conventional wisdom on anything/always insists on inventing something new, it will often combine with Ti/Fi to declare anything that doesn't completely redefine the rules/invent its own entire new genre as automatically bad.

    Ti/Fi will often lead Ps to judge art according to arbitrary inner standards of what "good art" is and hold lots of art up to standards it never purported to meet. (i.e., "This rap song SUCKS because it doesn't sound like [my favorite genre here.]"

    Well, if you'd stop evaluating rap songs according to the standards of some completely different genre, and paid attention to the music itself in context, you might realize why a lot of it is very good, even if you don't personally enjoy it.

    NPs often have trouble accepting whatever they personally define as so-called "low-brow art" because they refuse to accept it for what it is/seem unable to consider anything as a genre piece.

    It's especially bad because NPs pride themselves on being outwardly open/creative/flexible, so it often leads us to either consider our arbitrary musical standards as "objectively correct" (this is a function of Ji) or to just say fuck it and pretend that it's all 100% subjective so that there's no reason to even bother. Both of these approaches are inferior.

    In reality, you can't judge the objective quality of any music without listening to a lot of other music from the same period/understanding the cultural context in which it was conceived--otherwise you simply have nothing to go on.

    When you're a music reviewer, it's not your job to simply tell the readers what you enjoy/don't enjoy. You should be able to write good reviews of albums you don't like and vice versa; no one wants to hear about John Q. Critic's personal biases.
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  6. #106
    Junior Member Kobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    28

    Default

    You got me very excited metaphours. ;D One night sleep and we'll know if your right.

    While waiting, this derailed thread can entertain me.

    "We all have time to spend or waste, and it is our decision what to do with it. But once passed, it is gone forever. "-Bruce lee

  7. #107
    Freshman Member simulatedworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    OH MY GOD DERAILED THREADS HEAD FOR THE HILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111
    If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

  8. #108
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    I mean, if you don't enjoy that album/Radiohead in general, then fair enough. I can't tell you what to like or dislike.

    And though I'm 99.9% sure you don't care to hear it, I can give you lots of theoretical reasons that "Just" (along with almost every track on that album) are really interesting innovations in the fields of songwriting and production.

    In other words, you may not like it, which is fair enough, but based on a number of factors chances are it's probably good.
    I do like it, and think the album is very good. I just think what came after outshines it.

  9. #109
    Senior Member Moiety's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Posts
    6,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    In reality, you can't judge the objective quality of any music without listening to a lot of other music from the same period/understanding the cultural context in which it was conceived--otherwise you simply have nothing to go on.
    You don't think good music is good irrespective of context?

    I do agree with part of your post.

    Radiohead, to me, is an example of our arbitrary tastes and success criteria are in the music business. There are somewhat similar-sounding bands (at least when compared to other successful bands) out there that the average joe might like, that he just never got a chance to hear. Thus Radiohead starts getting worshipped as something otherworldly since "there's clearly nothing like it".

  10. #110
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    When you say "demonstrated more skill", you have to be careful because "skill" means a lot of different things and most non-musicians are inclined to interpret it as "skill=technical chops", which is ridiculous. If that were the case, Yngwie Malmsteen would be universally considered the greatest guitarist of all time, which is stupid.
    What's your point? The only thing I said about skill is that it is something which likely could be debated and analyzed in objective terms. I never said anything about how important it should be to people. I was using it as a counter-example to personal enjoyment.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    In terms of music critique, "skill" doesn't refer to technical playing chops or to emotional impact on particular people, but rather to how the artist compares to other artists in similar genres from the same time period. The context is EVERYTHING.
    Great. Then I can frame any band I want by stretching around the definition of it's genre and the expanse of the so-called period I say they represent. But even if we had somehow all agree to some clear rules about what constitutes a genre and a period, it would still be subjective to say who is the best musician of the genre and period.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Many NP types have trouble evaluating music according to the contextual standard in which it was conceived/created. Since Ne refuses to accept conventional wisdom on anything/always insists on inventing something new, it will often combine with Ti/Fi to declare anything that doesn't completely redefine the rules/invent its own entire new genre as automatically bad.
    I don't rate the value of music by how original I think it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Ti/Fi will often lead Ps to judge art according to arbitrary inner standards of what "good art" is and hold lots of art up to standards it never purported to meet. (i.e., "This rap song SUCKS because it doesn't sound like [my favorite genre here.]"
    I don't think there is a way to assert, as a general fact, that there is "good" are. As for my own personal idea of good art, I base it on what I respond positively to. That's all. I could try to figure out what the recurring themes are in the things I respond positively to, but that wouldn't actually tell my why I think it's any good. Again, this is because response to art, especially music, is essentially irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    Well, if you'd stop evaluating rap songs according to the standards of some completely different genre, and paid attention to the music itself in context, you might realize why a lot of it is very good, even if you don't personally enjoy it.
    First of all... I say rap sucks exactly because I don't personally enjoy it. I'm not telling anyone else they have to do dislike it though, and I think that would be really stupid. You see, given that I think one can't really make a case for music being better or worse to others, the only measure I have for my own idea of good music is simply whether or not I enjoy it. Music essentially can't be good beyond personal enjoyment, as it serves no other purpose that I know of, and something is only as good as the purpose it serves and the effectiveness in which it can fullfilll that purpose.

    That being said, this context thing is stupid. Let's take this to the logical extreme. If I establish any set of perameters for success, and then meet those perameters better than anyone, is my work always supposed to be praised as great? So if the goal is to make the loudest and most undisturbed sine wave possible, and I do that, I should be respected for achieving the utimate extents of this "genre"? I would say that the aims of the genre suck in and of themselves as far as I am concerned, and thus say even the best loud sine wave musician sucks.

    I still acknowledge it as personal taste though, in spite of how hard it would be for me to imagine someone liking that.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    NPs often have trouble accepting whatever they personally define as so-called "low-brow art" because they refuse to accept it for what it is/seem unable to consider anything as a genre piece.
    I think genres are a mess. I think they are so blurry as to be essentially useless. And again, this NP doesn't think defining quality of art in objective terms is possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    It's especially bad because NPs pride themselves on being outwardly open/creative/flexible, so it often leads us to either consider our arbitrary musical standards as "objectively correct" (this is a function of Ji) or to just say fuck it and pretend that it's all 100% subjective so that there's no reason to even bother. Both of these approaches are inferior.
    I do the latter. I find your psycho-analysis of why I come to that conclusion bizarre, and wrong. Now seems to be the point where I should say that you never should have misapplied all of that abused MBTI mumbo jumbo into this topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    In reality, you can't judge the objective quality of any music without listening to a lot of other music from the same period/understanding the cultural context in which it was conceived--otherwise you simply have nothing to go on. because there isn't any.
    That's my correction.

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    When you're a music reviewer, it's not your job to simply tell the readers what you enjoy/don't enjoy. You should be able to write good reviews of albums you don't like and vice versa; no one wants to hear about John Q. Critic's personal biases.
    I think music reviewers are mostly pointless. Here's the only thing a reviewer is good for to me: They are good if they can give me all of the declarative, in arguable facts about what they are reviewing. I don't really care about any aspect of their opinion though.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

Similar Threads

  1. New Radiohead album
    By swordpath in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-16-2011, 04:31 AM
  2. Hi, new INFP
    By JivinJeffJones in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-25-2007, 12:16 PM
  3. Hi, I'm new
    By JAVO in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-24-2007, 02:48 PM
  4. New to the Mirror Universe
    By outmywindow in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-24-2007, 02:20 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO