agreed. there are forms of trash music, but all in all, creativity is creativity. as for metal, I for one, being a sad music major, feel that all forms of commercial music have been dumbed down. hence why i listen to bands with names like impaled (www.impaled.info) or exhumed (Link Removed) or dying fetus (www.dyingfetus.com) and the blakc dahlia murder (www.theblackdahliamurder.com because i don't need the emotion involved in the music (ever since i went to college i didn't really feel it much); i need RAW TALENT.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Is there such a thing as bad music?
- Thread starter i like tictacs
- Start date
I think that when music is played with passion, and love for the sound, it will be good. No matter how bad the composition or whatever. I would much more enjoy listening to someone who loves their music, than someone who doesn't, and has way more talent.
But I chose my music on lyrics more than passion or anything else, I believe the words is where there is a thin line between what can touch others, and what can just touch the muscian. And that is part of the good/bad music thing.
But I chose my music on lyrics more than passion or anything else, I believe the words is where there is a thin line between what can touch others, and what can just touch the muscian. And that is part of the good/bad music thing.
danqi said:Another philosophical attempt: There is nothing in this world that we can be 100% sure of. Bertrand Russell showed us so (even though he was not the first to think of that, but the one who developed and popularized this thought) and as far as I know, no one has proven him wrong.
Thus we can neither answer this question with a "yes" nor with a "no".
BUT, we can and must work with probabilities. And I think because of various highly plausible indications, that, no, there is most likely no objective measure of quality for music. Even if you take a non-musician and let him beat your bass, and 100 people agree that the results are awful, somewhere, someone might like it; possibly me.
Is this argument settled now? No, we approach it differently by altering our definition of the word "objective". If by "objective" we mean "that which a selected group of people or their vast majority agrees on", then the answer can be a yes. For example: If 90% of all musicians say Britney Spears sucks, then that is objective by this definition.
Of course, this definition bears problems, but it is pretty much the definition we use most often in everyday contexts.
Thus it is, as everything else, a matter of definition.
Great post!
danqi said:Now the argument is settled.
Except for that part.
What makes music good is if someone... anyone likes it. If even one person likes a song/band... it's good, generally speaking.
- Dec 16, 2002
- 1,012
- 300
- 57
- Disclosures
- Warehouse Manager : Reverend Guitars
Explain William Hung...... He can not carry a tune. The record company put it out knowing they would make money just out of curiosity sake. But yet he sang it with all his heart. So it's good cause he sang it with passion, but it's bad because it was put out for $$$ only.... Ponder away....
Because William Hung is a joke: His record sold not because of his songs, but the banter between songs where he raves about his passion for music, and how he sings from the "hawt."
And we Americans are obsessed with accents, especially when it makes the accented say things "wrong." One might go as far as to call it racist, but I think people are too uptight about that issue all together. Nobody every said "it's good cause he sang with passion," the say, "it's good because it's stupid."
And we Americans are obsessed with accents, especially when it makes the accented say things "wrong." One might go as far as to call it racist, but I think people are too uptight about that issue all together. Nobody every said "it's good cause he sang with passion," the say, "it's good because it's stupid."
www.youhavebadtasteinmusic.com
My friend found this one, its kinda ridiculus, and will prolly piss some people off. but it shows how some people (or this on guy to be specific) feel is the line between good and bad music. Again subjective to about a million things. The way i see it is if you connect to it in someway, whether it be on a sub-concious level, a physical level (getting up and dancing) or an emotional level or any other, theres probably something good in it, somewhere, and it mught be more along theory and musical structure, or it might just "have a good groove" or you just "know how that feels". In my experience with jazz, i've found some stuff i loved, and i've listened to some of the more incoherent stuff and it just plain old sounds ugly to me. But those guys playing it probly loved what they were doing. theres different things with good and bad as well, like musical structure or good or bad technique, good or bad lyrics, good or bad skillwise. Good or bad depends on what you're looking at ESPECIALLY with art. And i definately consider music art. And for those out there who look and see those doing it to make money, there is even art in advertising. In my opinion i dont think we're askin the right question.
My friend found this one, its kinda ridiculus, and will prolly piss some people off. but it shows how some people (or this on guy to be specific) feel is the line between good and bad music. Again subjective to about a million things. The way i see it is if you connect to it in someway, whether it be on a sub-concious level, a physical level (getting up and dancing) or an emotional level or any other, theres probably something good in it, somewhere, and it mught be more along theory and musical structure, or it might just "have a good groove" or you just "know how that feels". In my experience with jazz, i've found some stuff i loved, and i've listened to some of the more incoherent stuff and it just plain old sounds ugly to me. But those guys playing it probly loved what they were doing. theres different things with good and bad as well, like musical structure or good or bad technique, good or bad lyrics, good or bad skillwise. Good or bad depends on what you're looking at ESPECIALLY with art. And i definately consider music art. And for those out there who look and see those doing it to make money, there is even art in advertising. In my opinion i dont think we're askin the right question.
i like tictacs said:
Yes, IMHO.
To me, if a singer can't stay in pitch then he/she is bad. If a drummer can't play in time then then he/she is bad. I saw a Blues band a few weeks ago. Their guitarist was sloppy and playing leads out of key. Their singer sounded like she gargled with with gravel. The bassist wasn't smooth at all with his execution. I thought they were "bad", and so did just about everyone else in the room.
And I do believe in a such thing as bad songwriting. I've heard ametuers and I've heard professionals. There's a huge difference between the two.
This whole attitude of "Yeah, we're not great musicians, but we bring the energy/connect with the crowd/ect." is BS. When I see a band, I want to see people skilled at their craft, not a bunch of ametuers hiding behind the pretentiousness of it being "art" and it's all "subjective".
That's not to say that music skill is totally objective. Paul McCartney and Victor Wooten are both amazing bass players. Though Vic is the superior player when it comes to technical chops, Paul has the ability to write a line that works perfectly with the song. The thing is though: both can play in time, playin in key, and have the mechanics down.
Music made purely for the money, using the image (sexiness/looks/etc.) of the "artist" is in my eyes bad. If there's no enjoyment/motivation factor than the cash, then it just becomes a bit sad.
Music should be about artists expressing themselves.
Now.. ..I'm probably not that objective now. A song made purely for making money can be good.. ..but I don't like the thought of it.
Music should be about artists expressing themselves.
Now.. ..I'm probably not that objective now. A song made purely for making money can be good.. ..but I don't like the thought of it.
