|
"Taste is subjective" (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Clovis |
| People who voted for George Bush have bad taste in politics. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by iammesol
I don't know what you're trying to prove. :conf: |
That the word "subjective" is used as a last resort of the brainless and gutless at least as often it's used by people who have taken any time to think about what it implies.
90% of the people so quick to run for the cover of "subjectivity" talk out of the other side of their mouths and make fun of other people's tastes all day long. And they don't listen to music indiscriminately, as if the features of the music are "all subjective anyway" and don't really matter. They have reasons for liking it. And "subjective" or not, those reasons are what music discussion is about.
A good portion of the time the "subjectivity" line is either irrelevant or a bunch of hypocritical bull. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
That the word "subjective" is used as a last resort of the brainless and gutless at least as often it's used by people who have taken any time to think about what it implies.
90% of the people so quick to run for the cover of "subjectivity" talk out of the other side of their mouths and make fun of other people's tastes all day long. And they don't listen to music indiscriminately, as if the features of the music are "all subjective anyway" and don't really matter. They have reasons for liking it. And "subjective" or not, those reasons are what music discussion is about.
A good portion of the time the "subjectivity" line is either irrelevant or a bunch of hypocritical bull. |
You tell that motherfucker! |
|
|
| iammesol |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
That the word "subjective" is used as a last resort of the brainless and gutless at least as often it's used by people who have taken any time to think about what it implies.
90% of the people so quick to run for the cover of "subjectivity" talk out of the other side of their mouths and make fun of other people's tastes all day long. And they don't listen to music indiscriminately, as if the features of the music are "all subjective anyway" and don't really matter. They have reasons for liking it. And "subjective" or not, those reasons are what music discussion is about.
A good portion of the time the "subjectivity" line is either irrelevant or a bunch of hypocritical bull. |
Okay. I understand that. You are correct, and I believed you correct before I posted. But that doesn't mean most of the time you can objectively judge a track. I wish people would quit taking everyone's statements so seriously and realize that every single post is just the way a person perceives something... not a fact. |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
That the word "subjective" is used as a last resort of the brainless and gutless at least as often it's used by people who have taken any time to think about what it implies.
90% of the people so quick to run for the cover of "subjectivity" talk out of the other side of their mouths and make fun of other people's tastes all day long. And they don't listen to music indiscriminately, as if the features of the music are "all subjective anyway" and don't really matter. They have reasons for liking it. And "subjective" or not, those reasons are what music discussion is about.
A good portion of the time the "subjectivity" line is either irrelevant or a bunch of hypocritical bull. |
You're absolutely right, but don't you think a fair amount of the rest of the time (especially on here) there are discussions that genuinely wind up at "I like this" vs. "I don't like this"?
:conf:
I have a fairly good feeling as to why this topic has come up, the "subjectivity" line does get pulled out here quite often - but it's a fine line between telling people what they should like if they aren't idiots, and just disagreeing based on taste.
There's a fair number of intelligent people on this forum who I think have absolutely ing wretched taste in music - I'm not sure I'm ready to call them hypocrites or full of just because we don't have the same taste. |
|
|
| distant |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
You're absolutely right, but don't you think a fair amount of the rest of the time (especially on here) there are discussions that genuinely wind up at "I like this" vs. "I don't like this"? |
TA largely consists of ignorants who seem to be drawn here under the impression that it's dedicated to epic trance. These are the people who have serious problems with motivating fondness of their chosen music, so it's no wonder they're usually the ones to come up with the old " you, it's subjective, I like this".
There is a point where both parties to an argument must concede subjectivity, I just have a problem with the people around here who skip the discussion altogether.
Luckily there's forums out there where you don't feel like you're arguing with a brick wall...
So in conclusion: Too much bull, not enough discussion, especially on here. |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by distant
So in conclusion: Too much bull, not enough discussion, especially on here. |
Much more succinctly put than I managed. :) |
|
|
| Lilith |
| quote: | Originally posted by distant
TA largely consists of ignorants who seem to be drawn here under the impression that it's dedicated to epic trance. |
Hmm, those bastards are back... where's my rifle... :whip: |
|
|
| Meat187 |
Seriously, what is this crap about certain tastes being more evolved / advanced / better than others. That's utter bull. I'm astonished how many otherwise intelligent people come up with this stupid argument around here.
Listening to minimal house or Psy Trance is not an inch superior/ [add other judgemental adjective here] than liking ASOT or Happy Hardcore. |
|
|
| richg101 |
i dont think anyone should have to backup their reasoning for liking or disliking a musical piece/genre/etc. its only the ty forum sector who look so deep into music before deciding if they like it or not. who gives a shi.t about if a track uses a tried and tested style, or gives birth to a completely new genre altogether, or has a unorthodox arrangement?. does a track need to be made from completely new synthezised sounds?, if a track is nice and has been made using factory presets and raw drum loops i dont care.
I know there are lots of people (simple and intelligent) with little or no real interest in looking deep into the piece or the artist, and im kinda jealous of them because they listen to music and either like or dislike it, they dont listen from a musicians or geeks' critical point of view.
These forums are full of people so caught up in trying to decide whether or not to like a piece of music, that they never get round to enjoying music. Music taste is subjective and thats all there is too it. |
|
|
| Trance-MB |
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
Dude, this track is a classic...you are SUPPOSED to like it and feel ecstatic...you are forced to like it...! its the original TRANCE! :eyespop:
I personally like this track...:p |
Even calling a track a classic is subjective.....
I never heard of it and like most of Sven Vath's tracks I again don't like it. |
|
|
| Paradox Lost |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trance-MB
Even calling a track a classic is subjective..... |
Eh, depends upon how you're approaching the idea of a 'classic' in this case.
If you're alluding to something that was dramatically influential, or assumed a significant role in setting in motion trends and developments that were to follow, I would say there is more of an objective angle to be taken in that regard...though I suspect, in some capacity, there is some subjectivity involved.
That essentially relates to what I find to be one of the essential questions within this entire discussion- to what extent can you objectively evaluate other people's musical tastes? |
|
|
|
|
