I Must Be Getting Old

[etoncrow]

Originally Posted by Stewie26

...Is it just me? If you are younger, do you like this music? If you are older, do you not like this music? Thanks...

One word: cacophany

[Roadkill]

Originally Posted by etoncrow

One word: cacophany

Right word: cacophony

[Stewie26]

Originally Posted by etoncrow

One word: cacophany

Ok...I had to look it up.

Definition of CACOPHONY
: harsh or discordant sound : dissonance 2; specifically : harshness in the sound of words or phrases
»
Examples of CACOPHONY

The sounds of barking dogs and sirens added to the cacophony on the streets.
<the cacophony of a pet store full of animals>
The cacophony of phlegmatic and tubercular lungs was punctuated here and there by a moan or a scream of someone terrified, thrashing in the throes of a nightmare. —Ronald Gearles, Undoing Time, 2001

[Unrepresented]

Originally Posted by FromTheBassMent

This is an incoherent response to my post. I'm discussing artistic values, asking questions about how people make decisions about what is great and lasting art, and you suggest I'm trying to stop artists from expressing themselves? Huh?!?!?

Everybody makes their own rules for the world that is their life. Without some sort of values that you intrinsically embrace as guidelines for your experience of life, there is no way to make sense of the world. I'm simply interested in knowing what other people's rules are. That's a valid and meaningful way to learn about humanity. And it's a way to elevate the intellectual exchange above the level of "I like this but I don't like that."

Sorry if that's too heady a discussion for this forum. Maybe we should just go back to trying to figure out the best overdrive pedal for metal.

Sheesh.

Picasso is the best artist because he's the only one who lets me see both sides of the subject's face in profile portraits. All those other painters were half-assing it.

[etoncrow]

Originally Posted by Unrepresented

Picasso is the best artist because he's the only one who lets me see both sides of the subject's face in profile portraits. All those other painters were half-assing it.

"I've been doing a lot of abstract painting lately, extremely abstract. No brush, no paint, no canvas, I just think about it." - Steven Wright

[Bloodhammer]

First, FromTheBassMent says that goodness is an objective thing and that one can rightly say one band is greater than another (based on an "understanding of what goes into good songwriting and performing" - according to him), and now he says, "Everybody makes their own rules for the world that is their life."

It's one or the other. Either a band/artist's musical worth is a measurable thing that people generally all agree on and are "gonna go, 'well, yeah, that's really very, very good.'" (given the bands in question are Monsters Of Folk/M Ward/Bright Eyes/My Morning Jacket nexus), or everyone has a valid opinion on what they think good music is and the matter is subjective.

So which is it?

[Unrepresented]

Originally Posted by etoncrow

"I've been doing a lot of abstract painting lately, extremely abstract. No brush, no paint, no canvas, I just think about it." - Steven Wright

Ultimately, art involves both an artist and an audience. The artist creates their craft, the audience has their emotional response to it, whether it be fists pumping in the air or an introspective look at how the cold Russian winters may be an analogy to their own failure to open themselves up emotionally to their ex-wife.

There's no consensus on what's "best" because there's so many different people in the world with different emotional responses and different ways of achieving them. That's what art does. It reaches an emotion inside of us. If this doesn't reach you, then it's no fault of yours or theirs. It's simply not a good match.

[Bromosapian]

Transplant this discussion to people talking about jazz 80 years ago, rock, blues, etc. Myopic old men that have been passed on by evolution.

oh and to anyone that thinks that this is popular, you are fools. The same knock off r&b garbage has been popular forever.

[Aubrinator]

Originally Posted by Red_Merkin

So YOU'RE the guy who leaves this exact comment on all those YouTube videos...

Nah, that's other people. I try not to shove my good musical taste in my peers' faces.

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by Bromosapian

Transplant this discussion to people talking about jazz 80 years ago, rock, blues, etc. Myopic old men that have been passed on by evolution.

oh and to anyone that thinks that this is popular, you are fools. The same knock off r&b garbage has been popular forever.

Indeed. It is every generation's responsibility to come up with music that will irritate their elders.

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by Unrepresented

Ultimately, art involves both an artist and an audience. The artist creates their craft, the audience has their emotional response to it, whether it be fists pumping in the air or an introspective look at how the cold Russian winters may be an analogy to their own failure to open themselves up emotionally to their ex-wife.

There's no consensus on what's "best" because there's so many different people in the world with different emotional responses and different ways of achieving them. That's what art does. It reaches an emotion inside of us. If this doesn't reach you, then it's no fault of yours or theirs. It's simply not a good match.

Pretty much my opinion about art (including music).

[Clef_de_fa]

Originally Posted by Unrepresented

Ultimately, art involves both an artist and an audience. The artist creates their craft, the audience has their emotional response to it, whether it be fists pumping in the air or an introspective look at how the cold Russian winters may be an analogy to their own failure to open themselves up emotionally to their ex-wife.

There's no consensus on what's "best" because there's so many different people in the world with different emotional responses and different ways of achieving them. That's what art does. It reaches an emotion inside of us. If this doesn't reach you, then it's no fault of yours or theirs. It's simply not a good match.

I think that any "art" that contain an Artist and an Audience is biased even before the Audience as a chance of seeing/hearing it. Why ?because the "artist" will try to please the Audience ... this isn't really "art" this is just entertaining.

Art should be about and "Artist" and his "vision" his own "creativity" and his own "imagination". I don't think Picasso did give a f*** about the public reaction, he just did it. If he did all his painting with the style a-la-mode and following every rules of popularity ,we wouldn't talk about Picasso knowaday. He would be a forgotten painter.

[Clef_de_fa]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu1u5uBe9So

to me this is art, the composer only wrote what he heard which fit the serialism movement to a certain extend, he didn't try to sell his soul to the devil by making mainstream music in the taste of the day that will change soon after that style will be milked to death.

[Basshappi]

I liked the box fan backline.
The uh cacophony...not so much.

[gr8bassplayer]

Originally Posted by alexlocurto

Well, I'm fifteen, and that sounded appalling. Does that mean I'm old too?

I'm 16, and I know a few kids who listen to this kind of crap... It amazes me how they can even put up with anything like this. Then they call it "talent". That is why I'm worried for our generation...

[Unrepresented]

Originally Posted by Clef_de_fa

I think that any "art" that contain an Artist and an Audience is biased even before the Audience as a chance of seeing/hearing it. Why ?because the "artist" will try to please the Audience ... this isn't really "art" this is just entertaining.

Entertaining is a craft. Art is the byproduct of successful craft that achieves an emotional connection between the artist and the audience. Art is the entertainment. The entertainment is art. The music, images, dance, webdesign, professional wrestling moves, etc. are just means to achieve it. Art is not a tangible, it's the shared epiphany.

Originally Posted by Clef_de_fa

Art should be about and "Artist" and his "vision" his own "creativity" and his own "imagination". I don't think Picasso did give a f*** about the public reaction, he just did it. If he did all his painting with the style a-la-mode and following every rules of popularity ,we wouldn't talk about Picasso knowaday. He would be a forgotten painter.

That doesn't make Picasso the only artist, just a much more successful one in that his resonance with the public has proven more enduring. And that would go back to giving the audience the defining power in determining the value of art.

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by gr8bassplayer

I'm 16, and I know a few kids who listen to this kind of crap... It amazes me how they can even put up with anything like this. Then they call it "talent". That is why I'm worried for our generation...

Oh my gods, different people like different music?! Shocking! Who would have thought?!

[Hobobob]

Don't really care too much for the music, but I think I'd have fun at the show. I've been to a few shows (and even played a couple) that consisted of a bunch of bands like this. The energy and atmosphere sort of makes up for my inability to understand what's going on onstage.

[Clef_de_fa]

Originally Posted by Unrepresented

Entertaining is a craft. Art is the byproduct of successful craft that achieves an emotional connection between the artist and the audience. Art is the entertainment. The entertainment is art. The music, images, dance, webdesign, professional wrestling moves, etc. are just means to achieve it. Art is not a tangible, it's the shared epiphany.

That doesn't make Picasso the only artist, just a much more successful one in that his resonance with the public has proven more enduring. And that would go back to giving the audience the defining power in determining the value of art.

Then we don't share the same view as to what is Art and what isn't.

[Nev375]

OK, as an old (40 something?) guy that doesn't get it, can I just get some feedback about what is good about this kind of.... performance?

So far, we've got:

They have a lot of energy.