Is it possible to objectively judge music? (country, rock, genre)

WaspStar · 09-27-2008, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

I don't think anyone has ever looked at an album like Blonde on Blonde or Revolver or Pet Sounds in an objective way.

They're albums that struck a chord with people at the right time in the right place both musically & socially ,and are fondly remembered for doing so , that's why they are regarded so highly. They're not regarded highly because someone looked at them and decided they were the finest example of music ever made and then decreeing it to everybody.

I can see where you're coming from, that an artist's or album's influence at a certain time certainly biases its reputation (Elvis Presley, anyone?), but one could make an argument that, since the Beatles and Bob Dylan consistantly capture the imagination of multiple generations, their music has some sort of inherent staying power. (I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I'm really interested in responses to this).

Still, like jackjammer said, the problem is that some critics do seem to judge from a detached base, which ruins the purpose of music. No one listens to an album because it's "good"; we listen to music because we can relate to it.

If it is possible to objectively judge music (and I don't think it is), that exercise has no purpose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

I think there's a lot to be said for music journalism when it comes to articles & interviews. I've just never had any time for reviews.

If I write one I use it as a platform to say why I like it or dislike it. Looking at it in an objective way is not something I have ever even given any thought to. I mean why would I?
To do that i'd have to approach it from a distance and thats not why I listen to music. I want to share how a piece of music has affected me , not to break it down into little components and lecture people.

The only music reviews worth reading are ones that focus on the author's personal experience, imo (parts of Greil Marcus' "Stranded," this book called "This Is Uncool" by Gary Mulholland, etc). The reviews that try to place music in a social context and analyze its political effects (Dave Marsh, Jon Landau, etc) annoy me to no end.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fruitonica

I would say that some people have more credible opinions, but in the end it still all subjective.

How do some people have more credible opinions (and how do you tell?)? Perhaps experience (i.e., listening to lots of music), but as you said, it's still subjective (and listening to a lot of music would only tend to further bias one's opinions, I would think).

Brad Stengel · 09-27-2008, 08:02 AM

Theres a few things about this, that as much as everyone wants to argue logically, comes up as issues:

1. I think we can all agree that Revolver is better than The Backstreet Boys' Christmas Album. This opinion is so unanimous that there must be some inherent quality in one, that is the opposite of the other. What is it?

2. Furthermore, about certain people having better opinions: I really think it's a combination of exposure and open-mindedness. For example, if you asked me to name my 10 favorite bands now, we could all agree its much more eclectic than it would have been 5 years ago (90% Classic Rock) and also of much higher quality 10 years ago (Mainstream radio 1998-Korn, Limp Bizkit, Soundgarden, etc.)

So clearly something changed in those 10 years to make my musical tastes change to something more accepted (widely assumed among people into music as 'better quality'). The only things I can think of are the two I mentioned.

It's NOT just a matter of opinion-everything is/everything isn't. People who prefer McDonald's to a really nice restaurant can have that opinion...but nobody takes it seriously...why? Its the same deal with music.

Brad Stengel · 09-27-2008, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

lolol.

Anyway, no, it's not possible to judge anything objectively. You'd have to be a pretty egotistical ****hole to think you can.

Lets cut out the second half of my statement to make it say something entirely different!

09-27-2008, 08:02 AM	#2 (permalink)
Brad Stengel This Space for Rent Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 815	Theres a few things about this, that as much as everyone wants to argue logically, comes up as issues: 1. I think we can all agree that Revolver is better than The Backstreet Boys' Christmas Album. This opinion is so unanimous that there must be some inherent quality in one, that is the opposite of the other. What is it? 2. Furthermore, about certain people having better opinions: I really think it's a combination of exposure and open-mindedness. For example, if you asked me to name my 10 favorite bands now, we could all agree its much more eclectic than it would have been 5 years ago (90% Classic Rock) and also of much higher quality 10 years ago (Mainstream radio 1998-Korn, Limp Bizkit, Soundgarden, etc.) So clearly something changed in those 10 years to make my musical tastes change to something more accepted (widely assumed among people into music as 'better quality'). The only things I can think of are the two I mentioned. It's NOT just a matter of opinion-everything is/everything isn't. People who prefer McDonald's to a really nice restaurant can have that opinion...but nobody takes it seriously...why? Its the same deal with music. __________________ These is the musics I own: http://rateyourmusic.com/collection/BradStengel/oo