Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
There's no objective subformula to the subjectivity of music, for it's really just a factor of taste.
|
I know this is absolutely true, but surely there is a case for saying that aspects of music can make some music better than other music?
For instance, I think that one of these pieces is clearly far superior to the other:
I think most would agree that Gershwin here outclasses Rancid in almost every way. I picked pretty obvious examples, but the point is that we can't use the premise "all taste is subjective" to lead to the conclusion "music can not be defined as 'bad' because that's down to subjectivity" on to the dubious final conclusion "all music is equally good because it is all in some for appreciated".
I've not been too clear, but I think there is a case for there to be some sort of recognition of music that is better.
I appreciate that some people will PREFER the Rancid song, but at the end of the day, should this mean that neither can be considered "better"?