Originally Posted by White Lies
(Post 334698)
I ask you; what is the point of music? To enjoy it, and to inspire emotions within you? That's what I look for. And if a pop-punk band can do that more effectively than a classical musician, then I won’t deny that I find the pop-punk band better than the classical artist, even if that seems ridiculous to "clasically trained" musicians who obviously look for different things.
I have addressed all of this before. I feel like you are trying so hard to come out of this "more correctly" you are blatantly ignoring my posts. I feel like you are intelligent enough to grasp my points, maybe I'm wrong. But if you insist... let me use this example - Your son draws a stick figure drawing of you and your wife and him in front of a crudely drawn house - that inspires more emotion than a random Monet painting... but who is a better artist?
I want music to be passionate, with interesting lyrics that can make a statement, that can encourage the listener and get them to think. That's what makes music good, to me. There are lots of bands who haven't had the chance to be classically trained are still perfectly capable of writing music that many people will find to hit all the right spots. I's all about the listener and what they look for, though. To me, there is more passion and substance in early Dinosaur Jr albums than I’ve ever heard from any Hendrrx.
Good for you.
You are correct, you didn't deny it. But you implied it was ridiculous and somehow wrong that Dinosaur Jr were beating Hendrx, and that people could possibly think that Dino were better. The fact you thought this was about "the best band" or whatever is IRRELEVANT. I am not discounting your right to state your opinion, I'm saying that don't spout bull**** like "musically blasphemous" just because the band you think (THINK, my friend) is better isn't winning. It was yr attitude, and how you seemed to think it was outside the realm of possibility that Dinosaur Jr could've made better music than Jimi Hendrix.
To me it's ridiculous. It's my right to believe so. To me, it's musically blasphemous. I'm sorry if you don't think so- but I don't cater to your opinions, nor will I lessen the intensity of my opinions because you think they're ridiculous. Look who is the one walking on rights now? I would never ask you to change your opinion. I will tell you I don't agree with you, and I don't think you're right... but I'll never ask you to change it. Here you are telling ME what or what not to say? Who do you think you are?
Prove that Hendrix is the best, and everyone knows that that is a fact. Then I'll concede you have a point.
I believe that Hendrix is the better musician. I believe. You can choose whether or not to share my opinion, if you do great, if you don't - ok whatever. Out of the two I believe Hendrix is the BEST, BETTER, yeah - I like DJr's music more, but that doesn't make them the BEST group. I hope you are grasping this concept.
Clearly. Since you understand that people have a different idea of what "the best" is, you (hopefully) can now recognize that there is no artist who SHOULD win the poll, whether it be someone's favorite OR who they regard "the best". So let people vote whatever way they want, and don't be a pompous ******* about it.
I've already admitted that I don't think anyone SHOULD win the poll when I realized we were doing favorites. If we were doing the BEST band, I think Hendrix SHOULD win. That's my opinion, and you're welcome to disagree with me. And whether or not you believe it - it is RELEVANT to the arguments I was making earlier. Just because you don't understand it doesn't make it any less viable. Do you understand Quantum Physics? You probably don't. Now, are quantum physics unintelligible because you -personally- don't understand them? Ok.
|
