Apr 3, 2017 this doesn't make sense why would the quality only be subjective to the person who created it and then suddenly switch to not being subjective when people other than the creator hear it?
Apr 3, 2017 Quality relies on a bunch of different metrics which people then assign value to on a personal basis. So yeah, taste is subjective on a personal level, but communicating/defending your appreciation for that rapper is only as strong as the objectivity of your argument. Nobody is going to believe you if you say Lil Anal Polyp is the best rapper "because I like him the most". It's fine to like things that aren't the best btw. I just had a bowl of Ramen Noodles. I don't have to claim they're the GOAT to enjoy them. Nobody is obligated to participate in the conversation of what makes things good and how they stack up against each other.
Apr 3, 2017 Michael Jackson is judged for Thriller and Bad, not Blood On The Dance Floor. Longevity doesn't mean much in retrospect. What they produced at their peak is what they'll be judged by, and the more great work someone puts out the better.
Apr 3, 2017 The value and time can be subjective in terms of selling the music, but i wasnt talking about that. Im just telling you music has value. I didnt say anything about the value of music automatically making it good quality. Quality is not the same as preference. There's nothing the listener can do to change the orientation of that track. Did you see my example? Listen to an artist like Oddisee.
Apr 3, 2017 Just because ramen noodles taste good, doesn't mean they're good for you. All that d--- sodium will f--- your blood pressure up. Preference vs. Quality
Apr 3, 2017 i agree with part of this, but i feel like this sort of falls apart when using food as an analogy and only goes to show how it's going to come down to personal taste always because past the quality of ingredients and health factors (something music doesn't have to worry about) our differing taste buds are the deciding factor of what tastes good to one individual and doesn't to another, and with music it's just what we enjoy personally based off our likes and dislikes
Apr 3, 2017 see, the problem with this argument is that there's no health factors to include with something like music, and food being good for your body is not the same thing as it tasting good, it's a different issue altogether, and as i said above, it's not one music has to worry about
Apr 3, 2017 what i'm saying is "quality" when it comes to music isn't a thing that exists, it's projected upon the music by the individual listening to it based on his or her dislikes. there's no inherent quality and changing the track doesn't have anything to do with this argument?
Apr 3, 2017 I didn't think it was a good example either, just felt like pointing out too much ramen is not a good thing.
Apr 3, 2017 ultimately, what i've been trying to make clear and have been struggling to do is that music's perceived quality is just that, and it's because in lieu of any real factors to judge it objectively, all that's left is how good it sounds or how deep it hits someone or how enjoyable it is or what it means to someone, but that is going to vary wildly from person to person because all of those factors come down to individual likes and dislikes and cannot be applied universally or objectively
Apr 3, 2017 That taste of ramen is a preference. The quality of ramen is without a doubt bad for you. But who the f--- thinks about high blood pressure as teen or young adult when you have the savory taste of chicken flavored ramen in front of you. I know I didn't. Preference vs. Quality! I could write a paper on the long term effects of ramen noodles. Don't mess with me, bro.
Apr 3, 2017 You say that, but yet both of us can agree that a gourmet dish from a restaurant is inherently "better" than a turd sandwich. We'd both chalk that up to objective qualities like better ingredients, fresh meat, more artisanal construction etc. Saying "our taste buds are different" or "it's subjective" isn't an argument. It's declaring that you aren't participating in the conversation of quality. Which, as I said, is fine. Just don't pretend it's valid in that realm of discussion. It's not.
Apr 3, 2017 Gdi, I step out to the store for like 20 minutes and this is what I come back to Gonna b a bit before I reply
Apr 3, 2017 i mean, quality of ingredients and health wise, sure, but if someones taste buds find the turd sandwhich more enjoyable, then that's that. we can think it's disgusting and tastes like absolute a--- but we're not that person who enjoys it, so we're only judging it that way because our taste buds don't align with theirs and anyways, even so, that's such an extreme example it wouldn't even apply 99% of the time even if it wasn't completely subjective. and it again cannot actually apply to music ppl like drone music and death grips and --- and all kinds of s--- your average music listener would find absolutely appalling to listen to, even going as far as comparing it simply to just plain noise it doesn't mean anything except that they don't enjoy it because their tastes don't allow for them to. it's not matching up with what they do or don't like in music or find enjoyable, whereas for the person that does like it, it does, as they like different things subjectivity absolutely is an argument when it comes to music, it's the only one that can be rationally made
Apr 3, 2017 again, you're not actually talking about the quality of the taste tho you're talking about a different issue, one that still can't apply to music even if it was relevant to food tastes quality
Apr 3, 2017 Okay, then no more commenting about Metro Boomin' being an average producer, because according to your worldview, nothing is objectively discernible and we're all walking through our own dream worlds without any common bearings. You don't truly believe that, because I've seen you make plenty of value claims which you just said are pointless and unverifiable. To clarify, I agree we all have subjective tastes about what we like or dislike. We're all still exposed to the same objective materials and our understanding of them can be more or less accurate than one another, which is where discussion comes into play. That's coming from somebody who doesn't believe in innate meaning to his own existence. I think we create our own meaning. That doesn't mean I can say fire isn't hot and have as much credibility as those who say otherwise. It just means I'm entitled to that opinion no matter how far divorced from reality it is. Also, this doesn't mean there is a single answer to what is best. Usually the people most familiar with a subject have the most nuanced, original opinions on it. We can starkly disagree and still both have defensible, well crafted interpretations of things.
