Do you think that music can be divided into good and bad?

VEGANGELICA · 11-02-2011, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blastingas10

Dylans song has nothing to do with the name of the magazine. The magazine, Dylans song, and the Rolling Stones band were named after the Muddy Waters song of the same name. Considering Rolling Stone magazines criteria, I'd say that "Like a Rolling Stone" is a good fit. I'm not saying I think it's the greatest. It would be impossible for me to say what song is the greatest ever. It's actually one Dylan that I got tired of rather fast. I think he has better songs. But considering that criteria, I think it's a good fit.

Ah...I didn't realize the source of the name of Rolling Stone Magazine. Thank you for that information.

I agree Dylan's "Like A Rolling Stone" does a good job of meeting the magazine's criteria that they seemed to be using to pick their greatest 500 songs. The reason I felt their choice was strange was that I don't like to listen to that song, and therefore I don't think of it as "good" music.

"Good" music to me is music I enjoy listening to, for whatever reason.

My criteria for "good" music:
(1) It holds my attention.
(2) I feel emotionally moved by it (except that it shouldn't make me annoyed *at* the song).
(3) The musician is doing something novel or conceptually clever and so the song sounds new and fresh to me.

I readily accept that other people's criteria for judging music are different than mine, and that there is no fixed "goodness" or "badness" inherent in music.

However, I don't much like the Rolling Stone Magazine's criterion that I numbered as 4: a song has "a strong statement that becomes part of the lexicon." This suggests that only famous songs can be considered "great."

Now THIS song, "Fine Objects" by Eskamon, tops my list of good music because it meets my criteria very well, especially my third criterion:

I like crunchy music that sounds like shattering glass and has an ominous yet playful feeling about it. I'd never heard such a song before listening to this one...and when I heard it, it was

. If I could shoot one song off into space to represent humanity's music, I might shoot this one!

Lisnaholic · 11-02-2011, 09:41 PM

Quote:

(From 500 Greatest Songs of All Time)
When you hear a great song,
(1) you can think of where you were when you first heard it, the sounds, the smells. It takes the emotions of a moment and holds it for years to come. It transcends time.
(2) a great song has all the key elements — melody;
(3) emotion;
(4) a strong statement that becomes part of the lexicon;
(5) and great production.

^ Thanks for digging up the Rolling Stone criteria, Vegangelica; that was interesting to read, but also disappointing, I felt. Here`s what I think of their criteria:-
(1) not relevent at all because it`s all about the emotions and memory of the listener, not about the merits of the music.
(2) and (3) are ok.
(4) as you suggest, this seems to rule out anything that isn`t famous, or catchy in some way.
(5) to me, that`s like saying that a great painting must be on top-quality canvas. With no disrespect to anyone involved in music production, I don`t think there`s necessarily a strong corelation between a great song and great production.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VEGANGELICA

"Good" music to me is music I enjoy listening to, for whatever reason.

My criteria for "good" music:
(1) It holds my attention.
(2) I feel emotionally moved by it (except that it shouldn't make me annoyed *at* the song).
(3) The musician is doing something novel or conceptually clever and so the song sounds new and fresh to me.

I readily accept that other people's criteria for judging music is different than mine, and that there is no fixed "goodness" or "badness" inherent in music.

However, I don't much like the Rolling Stone Magazine's criterion that I numbered as 4: a song has "a strong statement that becomes part of the lexicon." This suggests that only famous songs can be considered "great."

^ I think your criteria are way better than Rolling Stone`s - in fact, I`d like to adopt them myself !
I`d probably add these, as well:-
* the music should withstand time, so that it doesn`t date too fast, but rewards repeated listening.
* as a nod to those Victorians, it should fulfill its purpose.