Eminem - Revival

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

B) Yes, popularity is a piece of validation for how good an artist is. No, it's not the end all be all absolute proof that an artist is good, but it is a talking point that you guys just don't want to accept because it contradicts your pretentious, self righteous views that you have better music taste or have a more valid musical pallet than the average person. Let me show why popularity is a good talking point for an artists validation. If an artist sucks then their popularity is short lived. Mike Jones was garbage so he died. Paul Wall was garbage. Tons of artists were hot garbage and they ended up losing steam because they couldn't keep people's attention. With Eminem, he's retained popularity through his whole career being praised as one of the best. He's still running off of MMLP fumes. That album was so great that it is still the album we remember him by despite him releasing so many lack luster projects like Encore or Recovery. That is a classic album. It wasn't just some stupid fad that people mindlessly stuck to, it is still as popular today as it was back then. Retaining popularity like that is not easy unless you have something. That album also gets praised by most of hip hop, artists, fans, people that definitely are not casual listeners. Most rappers with that level of popularity is typically recognized or praised by people that are not casual fans of music. We can play the lazy game about people just having terrible taste, but if we want to talk objectively about musical taste what is good or bad taste in music is decided by the masses, not you outcasts. Don't pussy out by pulling this 'my opinion' bull**** like you don't talk as if your opinion is the universally accepted fact. Having good taste is having a taste that appeals to most people. Objectively. Which means that if you're taste isn't in line with the 'normies' (you guys are on some rick and morty bull**** right there, you guys are the annoying rick and morty fans of music) than you have bad taste. So yeah, popularity does matter, people don't gain and retain popularity for no reason, it's not strictly album sales that measure an artists popularity I think you have to be in tune with the general consensus on an artist which would be that Eminem is one of the greatest to ever do it.

It's a bad indicator of quality because it is not consistent for popular artists. Some great artists are certainly popular, but that only works in one direction since there are plenty of popular artists that are certainly not great.

Plus, talking about music from an "objective" point of view makes no sense because it's such a subjective medium. If you want to go more in depth into why you do or don't like them with specific reasons that can be identified or at least interpreted on a shared premise by anyone regardless of how they feel about the record, that would make more sense. But if you're going to go that deep and actually talk about the music, what's the point in resting on something as inconsistent and surface level as popularity?

[Ol’ Qwerty Bastard]

yeah that’s a ****ty argument

the “greatest” artist of any genre cannot be quantified, the moment you try and argue that it can, you lose.

but yes, a lot of people think eminem is the greatest rapper, thank you for repeating something we’ve already mentioned.

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by Frownland

It's a bad indicator of quality because it is not consistent for popular artists. Some great artists are certainly popular, but that only works in one direction since there are plenty of popular artists that are certainly not great.

Plus, talking about music from an "objective" point of view makes no sense because it's such a subjective medium. If you want to go more in depth into why you do or don't like them with specific reasons that can be identified or at least interpreted on a shared premise by anyone regardless of how they feel about the record. But if you're going to go that deep and actually talk about the music, what's the point in resting on something as inconsistent and surface level as popularity?

When you make statements like 'people who like this don't really listen to music' it's no longer in a realm of subjectivity, now is it? You don't get to switch back and forth like that. I think artists objectively deserve some kind of recognition for what they have done regardless of if you like it or not. Which is the difference between music appreciation and music enjoyment. Like I will never call ATCQ terrible artists because I appreciate what they have created, their legacy, their influence and their talent even though I don't particularly enjoy their music. Even their classics are really boring to me. I think popularity plays a part in that kind of validation whether you want to accept it or not. So when you invalidate the popularity of an artist because you claim the masses don't have as good of a taste as you do, that's not being subjective, that's honestly as lazy as using an artist's popularity in a discussion about your opinions.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

When you make statements like 'people who like this don't really listen to music' it's no longer in a realm of subjectivity, now is it?

It's more the fact that people appreciate music for different reasons. Some people only like quality emcees, others just want something on while they jog, others only want to listen to innovative music. We all interpret quality of music differently, therefore it's still subjective. I certainly have my own standards that the casual music listener does share in the slightest, but I'll tell those to you instead of just going "nyeh, popular" as you appear to be strawmanning here.

You don't get to switch back and forth like that. I think artists objectively deserve some kind of recognition for what they have done regardless of if you like it or not.

That's a conversation on influence which is much different from and more objective than quality. Maybe we're using different definitions for this. When I say quality, I just mean whether you think an album is good or bad. Even if that can be established objectively, popularity wouldn't be the tool to do so.

Which is the difference between music appreciation and music enjoyment. Like I will never call ATCQ terrible artists because I appreciate what they have created, their legacy, their influence and their talent even though I don't particularly enjoy their music. Even their classics are really boring to me. I think popularity plays a part in that kind of validation whether you want to accept it or not.

For quality? That makes no sense. If their music doesn't appeal to you, then you have no reason to deem it quality music.

So when you invalidate the popularity of an artist because you claim the masses don't have as good of a taste as you do, that's not being subjective, that's honestly as lazy as using an artist's popularity in a discussion about your opinions.

Idk about invalidating popularity since I will still recognize popular artists as such, but it is certainly idiotic to base your opinion of an artist on their popularity in either direction.

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by Frownland

It's more the fact that people appreciate music for different reasons. Some people only like quality emcees, others just want something on while they jog, others only want to listen to innovative music. We all interpret quality of music differently, therefore it's still subjective. I certainly have my own standards that the casual music listener does not have in the slightest, but I'll tell those to you instead of just going "nyeh, popular" as you appear to be strawmanning here.



That's a conversation on influence which is much different from and more objective than quality. Maybe we're using different definitions for this. When I say quality, I just mean whether you think an album is good or bad. Even if that can be established objectively, popularity wouldn't be the tool to do so.



For quality? That makes no sense. If their music doesn't appeal to you, then you have no reason to deem it quality music.



Idk about invalidating popularity since I will still recognize popular artists as such, but it is certainly idiotic to base your opinion of an artist on their popularity in either direction.

So you've never appreciated music that you didn't like? And you're arrogant enough to think that you're any different than a casual listener?

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

So you've never appreciated music that you didn't like?

Artists like Tupac and Biggie have massive influence and I would easily call them classics even though I hate their music and would never call it quality. Not sure if that counts as appreciation for you.

And you're arrogant enough to think that you're any different than a casual listener?

I can 100% guarantee you that I approach music differently from the casual listener, yes. Pretty sure that's not even arrogant lol.

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by Frownland

Artists like Tupac and Biggie have massive influence and I would easily call them classics even though I hate their music and would never call it quality.



I can 100% guarantee you that I approach music differently from the casual listener, yes. Pretty sure that's not even arrogant lol.

And you don't think massive popularity counts as influence? I can find quality in plenty of things I don't like. Like I said, the difference between appreciation and enjoyment. I know the kind of music I gravitate towards and all though I may find lots of quality from some artists, I'm not running out of my way to listen to it because it's not something I enjoy as often. That's why rather than calling them trash, like this trash Eminem album, I just say it's not my cup of tea or not my preference. It's like that rap album you were giving Goofle **** for not enjoying. He recognized the quality of the project but just could not enjoy it because the content went against his views. And don't pretend the personal views of an artist does not influence you're enjoyment. It's kind of weird that this concept of appreciation vs enjoyment is lost on such a huge music nerd.

Edit: On top of that, bringing up reasons on why you enjoy an artist or a song or what ever takes it away from being a subjective conversation and put it into an objective stance because you are then trying to validate your opinion to others who aren't really appreciative enough to try and understand where somebody is coming from. If you don't appreciate music you don't like then what's the use of discussing it when you're just a wall of opinions. You'll never find or understand something new, you're just there to push your opinions at people then **** on them for not having the same ones, which I guess some people could find that fun. Or maybe you're hoping for an echo chamber so we can all **** on the same ****. Which would be cool, I'd hope that we all hate Hopsin enough to **** on him.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

And you don't think massive popularity counts as influence?

I do. This is why I clarified that influence is different from quality.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

Edit: On top of that, bringing up reasons on why you enjoy an artist or a song or what ever takes it away from being a subjective conversation and put it into an objective stance because you are then trying to validate your opinion to others who aren't really appreciative enough to try and understand where somebody is coming from. If you don't appreciate music you don't like then what's the use of discussing it when you're just a wall of opinions. You'll never find or understand something new, you're just there to push your opinions at people then **** on them for not having the same ones, which I guess some people could find that fun. Or maybe you're hoping for an echo chamber so we can all **** on the same ****. Which would be cool, I'd hope that we all hate Hopsin enough to **** on him.

It's a far more valid way to approach talking about music objectively than banking on an artist's popularity.

You even reading my posts?

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by Frownland

It's a far more valid way to approach talking about music objectively than banking on an artist's popularity.

You even reading my posts?

And I never said that an artists popularity is the end all be all approach to discussing music objectively, just that it is much more important to the discussion than you want to acknowledge because it contradicts your taste. First post I literally said that.