• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Radiohead's New EP?

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
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.


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.
 

Kobe

New member
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
28
MBTI Type
INFP
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. :popc1:
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
OH MY GOD DERAILED THREADS HEAD FOR THE HILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111
 

MacGuffin

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,710
MBTI Type
xkcd
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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.
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
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".
 

Magic Poriferan

^He pronks, too!
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
14,081
MBTI Type
Yin
Enneagram
One
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
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".

Look, here's how it works in the music business...

If you're not making it anywhere, it's for one or both of two fundamental reasons:

1) Not enough people are willing to pay for your music, either because it's not good enough or not marketable enough (in business terms these are the same thing), or
2) You haven't made enough of an effort to market yourself.

The whole "zomg the music business is just RANDOM LUCK!" thing is total bullshit perpetuated by non-musicians who don't know what the fuck they're talking about and/or failed musicians who want to make excuses for having failed/continuing to fail.

I don't buy it. The amount of luck required to succeed in music is inversely proportional to the amount of work and time you're willing to put into it. Starting a band IS starting a business, and if you're not making money it's because you need to improve your product and/or the way you market it. End of story.

If you've been out touring the country and passing out thousands of demos for several years and nobody in the industry with any clout is taking notice or paying any attention, it's not because you're unlucky--it's because you suck. Industry scouts are everywhere; too many bands delude themselves into thinking they'll "make it when the right guy hears us"--if you're truly good, you'll be showered with praise virtually everywhere you go, because to informed and experienced people in the industry, it's obvious who's good and who isn't despite what your personal tastes happen to be.

Notice how labels don't sign totally unmarketable bands no matter how much the A&R guy happens to enjoy them?

It's just like poker players who whine and whine about how they're the unluckiest player in the world, because their perspectives aren't even wide enough to grasp the reasons why they suck. And yet the best players in both the music world and the poker world still come out with lots and lots of money every year, and I don't buy the bullshit socialist argument that everyone should be paid the same for not doing as good a job.

If you think that any "bad band" ever actually makes a lot of money, you're judging music according to arbitrary inner standards and you lack context.


magic porygon said:
--long post that i didn't finish reading--

Well, this is an awesome demonstration of why Ti/Fi tends to do a poor job of evaluating art. This time, though, I'm going to demonstrate my Ni and just say that I'm confident in my position on this that I genuinely don't care whether or not you understand.

Peace out!
 

Lethe

Obsession.
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
801
MBTI Type
iNtJ
Enneagram
152
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I wonder if this entire ordeal could be solved by clarifying the term "good".

Simulatedworlds' points would touch base with what is defined as 'musical quality'.
Magic Poriferan's points would touch base with what is defined as 'musically pleasing'.

For an example, someone could say Pavarotti's Nessun Dorma is technically flawless, but they could also say they prefer to listen to Paul Pott's emotional, imperfect rendition of it.
 

metaphours

cast shadows
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
1,194
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
OK, regardless of what you guys think, let's pull back to the main topic:

We didn't get a new EP, but we did get the official release of "These Are My Twisted Words," the song in question which sparked this whole fire of speculation. The song is available for digital download for free from the band's official website or via torrent. Sweeeet.
 

pure_mercury

Order Now!
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
6,946
MBTI Type
ESFJ
OK, regardless of what you guys think, let's pull back to the main topic:

We didn't get a new EP, but we did get the official release of "These Are My Twisted Words," the song in question which sparked this whole fire of speculation. The song is available for digital download for free from the band's official website or via torrent. Sweeeet.


That song isn't bad. Got more going on than the Harry Patch song for sure.
 

Lux

Kraken down on piracy
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
1,458
I loved it.

The quirky darkness made me smile and hit repeat.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Posts worthy of a new thread by r.a. and SimWorld have been moved here.
 

The Decline

(☞゚∀゚)☞
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
780
MBTI Type
?
Enneagram
5w4
The tracing paper translucent artwork was interesting. Song was decent.
 

metaphours

cast shadows
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
1,194
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
The tracing paper translucent artwork was interesting. Song was decent.
I really liked the artwork. The song sounded Krautrock-y, a bit like Liars circa Drum's Not Dead. Still a great song, but I definitely need to give it more time to grow on me ;).
 
Top