That said, Civilization Phaze III is clearly a better album than Francesco Zappa!
They are decidedly different compositions, though executed similarly in some respects.
That said, Civilization Phaze III is clearly a better album than Francesco Zappa!
Is there a right and wrong music we should listen to?
My opinion and arguments for it are stated, if you have a different opinion and a counter argument to go with it, I will gladly listen. How I "come across" is not a valid argument.Sweet, the Problem of Axiology has been definitively resolved
And here you've made a truth claim regarding one of humanity's most enduring philosophical problems. Careful with your hences....comes as across as elitist and reckless with deduction.
How I "come across" is not a valid argument.
I do appreciate nice trolling when I see one. Well done. If you want me to keep feeding you press 1.So, you value an argument with valid construction over a statement of how you "came across"?
Is there inherent value in validity or is this just a preference thing?
I do appreciate nice trolling when I see one. Well done. If you want me to keep feeding you press 1.
By that I mean how do we determine if a music was recorded properly in a studio?
I was made a mockery by some users in the USA Audiophile community for mentioning I liked this Local Trinidad song which apparently isn't up to audiophile quality because it isn't recorded in a studio? and the singer doesn't have a proper quality voice.....but if so how come there isn't wind blowing into the mic if this was really recorded by the sea? I was also made fun of picking music this and things like Space EDM as my choice of music I like.
I am not sure how to pick music that is of Audiophile standard.
The song is clearly recorded in a studio and if the people in the "USA Audiophile" community had half a brain between them they would hear (and see) that.
It's just a music video and they are not playing. Not only that, there's no audience and no equipment- the cables go nowhere. Look at the reflections in the lead singer's glasses- there is one guy on the whole beach and another with the camera.
Did you just... rickroll us? (Nahhh, it was not a link).
@oivavoi
"Staying power" sounds like the justification you have for referring to something as good. As I said, I don't think this property is more valid than any other one in expressing inherent quality in a piece of art. Some things can be preferred by some despite not having "staying power", while others can be un-favored by others despite having it.
I think you didn't understand my point – you see Bach and the Beatles as having "staying power" (thus inherent quality) because of your specific environment. Another person in a completely different environment would not experience the overwhelming abundance of preference towards those things to convince him of their inherent quality.
The easiest way to demonstrate it is by looking how different are traditional music styles in far-away places – Chinese music for example doesn't even sound coherent to a western ear, despite how Chinese people who grew up with it would consider it very tasteful and sophisticated. That's because they live in a different environment and have different perspective. Once you extend this argument to consider every individual person as its own specific environment and perspective, it's easy to see why every type of music could be universally "good" and "bad" at the same time – which means it's in fact neither, and this inherent quality is an illusion that depends on perspective, which arises from environment.
In practicality, I think it is honest to say "I hate hip-hop", but it's self-deluding to say "hip-hop is bad music" or even "it's not music". By addressing music (and art in general) in a subjective way, you can have real debate about its merits, and even change the perspective of other people about it. Stating objective phrases like "you shouldn't listen to this" or "this is bad" is counterproductive to useful discussion and learning, and most of the times just plain egotistical.
Ah, there's the rub. Bach was out of fashion and nearly forgotten. Bouguereau was acclaimed, then reviled. And then there's R. Mutt.the illusive idea of artistic value.
Ah, there's the rub. Bach was out of fashion and nearly forgotten. Bouguereau was acclaimed, then reviled. And then there's R. Mutt.
One can make one's own choices. For the O.P., that's good advice, IMO.
Could Mendelssohn have picked just any of Bach's contemporary composers, and people would have been just as impressed, because it was the very Mendelssohn who told them that this was worth listening to? I don't think so. Or, it's probably likely that quite a lot of people would have tried to like what they heard when Mendelssohn told them it was good stuff. But would it have caught on to the same degree, for that many listeners? I don't think so, at least.
.
I was made a mockery by some users in the USA Audiophile community
Your first mistake was hanging with them