Quote:
Originally Posted by Fruitonica
You can't really judge any art objectively, because there are no criteria for judging something purely aesthetic. You can objectively judge the technical skill involved in the music but that is the least part of what makes music great.
I would say that some people have more knowledgeable opinions, but in the end it still all subjective.
Really? I would say that most of the members are quite open to new musical styles.
And if you say you can objectively judge music, what makes your opinion superior to those who disagree with you?
|
Hmm, me thinks I poorly worded my thought.
I meant that I dont judge a band/song/album purely based upon who it is by, what genre its in, what time period it was made, what method was used to make it, the marketing that went into the albums success, or the conceited things an artist may say while he's on tv.
Whereas it seems that most people cant do those things.
50 cent talks about guns...his album must suck.
3 Days Grace only plays 3 chords...they must suck.
Johnny Cash was an opium head...he must suck.
Whitney Houston plays vocal gymnastics too much...she must suck.
She's a british midget trying to rap...she must suck.
I hear (and read) lots of people taking one little thing that often has very little to do with an artsists actual body of work and making sweeping judgements about their career and albums.
So in that regard yes I can objectively critique an album on a song by song basis of coursed based purely on my preferences but like I said my pallet isnt very restrictive.
I stand by my initial post, if you like a variety of music (not a variety of artists within one style) then you can objectively judge music because your bias is not as extreme or pronounced.