Originally posted by darvlayI do, but the whole point of this thread for me is to get away from hand-waving arguments about what is good and what is bad, and what's left.
I think his songs are "bad" but that, in general, Wesley Willis, as a DIY kind-of rock icon is "good". Know what I'm saying?
The interesting part to me is why people believe something is good but hate it anyway, or believe something is bad but love it anyway. I realize that people will tend to go along with what their friends or other people they respect say about music when questioned in public, but I want to know if there's anything more to this "personal enjoyment vs. musical achievement" dichotomy - or if it's even a dichotomy at all!
Originally posted by PBE6That's fine because I've had just about enough of talking to you.
I do, but the whole point of this thread for me is to get away from hand-waving arguments about what is good and what is bad, and what's left.
The interesting part to me is why people believe something is good but hate it anyway, or believe something is bad but love it anyway. I realize that people will tend to go along with what their friends or other peop ...[text shortened]... personal enjoyment vs. musical achievement" dichotomy - or if it's even a dichotomy at all!
1 edit
Originally posted by PBE61. Reminds me of childhood memories where everything was as fresh as the bright blue sky.
Now we have a warm body...
Why do you like "NO MORE MONKEYS JUMPING ON THE BED" if you don't consider it to be "good"? Does that mean that liking a piece of music is irrelevant to its status as either good or bad?
Also, why do you consider the Sex Pistols to be good music if you don't like them, and the only thing you find good about them is that they ar ...[text shortened]... one of them would be considered "good music" because they are good examples of anything.
2. Yes, "like" does not equate with good taste.
3. Punk genre has inherently good qualities but my taste in music does not allow me to fully appreciate it. Similar to how you could give me the best tasting oysters but I won't like them because i don't like the texture.
4. I'm not sure I follow your point in referencing examples of non-musical items. They are not good music because they have nothing to do with music.
2 edits
Originally posted by darvlayOk, let´s go.
But FIRST: define music.
(Including the duscussion about whether a silence can be music as well)
Music is sound, or deliberate absence of sound, created my people with the purpose of other people listening to it repeatedly and enjoy it.
This includes every style and every form of music that is possible. Some people might not call Spice Girls music (and neither would I if I think of it), but then again what would it otherwise be? Just sound? No. It was created with the intention of it being music, and whether we like it or not, that is just what makes it music. Very very bad music, but still, music. If Beethoven thought his 5th was crap, then he had every right to. I must agree with him. I like Tool, Porcupine Tree and Radiohead, but that´s my opinion. We can never call bad music to be no music at all. It´s all music, but we just dont like it. And whether music is bad or not is all matter of opinion, so we cannot agrue about that as well.
Now you guys go on about your fight. 😛
Originally posted by AstherealWhy "repeatedly"? Is an improvisation in a concert that doesn't get recorded not music because it's not created to be listened to repeatedly?
Music is sound, or deliberate absence of sound, created my people with the purpose of other people listening to it repeatedly and enjoy it.
And does it really have to be created with the purpose of other people listening to it? When I sit in my room and improvise for myself, is that not music?
I also don't think all music is created to be enjoyed. Some music is created to evoke feelings that wouldn't usually be called enjoyable, such as sadness or aggression.