|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on Jun 1, 2010 15:31:15 GMT -8
Seriously, metal gets one song? Yes, generally speaking, I dislike most metal. I might post more metal later but, for that post, I only wanted to post one song. This is like the second time you let emotion get in the way of logic, but I should've expanded on my statement. But it isn't an emotional statement, it was to re-emphasize that we have differing tastes in music. Logically speaking, the caveat of subjectivity mustn't be overlooked. If your response had been more clear, I'm sure pretty much all of this could have been avoided. Also... don't lecture me on different tastes, lest you forget that I've spoken to you about my understanding that people just have different tastes and/or poor tastes, and are impossible to be enlightened. One thing, I'm sure that we can agree on is: the musical tastes of an instrumentalist or musician, are better than the average crowd. Yeah, I pretty much disagree with all of this elitist perspective. Rather, I believe that a greater knowledge of music, however that is defined, allows a person to have a more specific understanding of their own tastes but does not significantly change them, aside from aspects that are secondary to the original qualities that they are attracted to. Of course, I can also go on about the different expectations of what music is intent to deliver but that's beside the point. Also, being really honest here, you listen to good music, its just the way that its recorded, with its lo fi, garage band ambience, really throws me off. So that's why I don't listen to it. Frankly, I also think avoiding finely produced music is a crutch to listening to music. I don't understand this 'crutch to listening to music.' On the contrary, I believe that production is largely secondary to the quality of the music. I can listen past the production aesthetics of pretty much anything. However, when it comes to 'finely' produced music, it isn't so much the production itself that turns me off. Instead, over produced (I'm fine with what I deem finely produced) music gives me the sense that the music itself is contrived, overwrought, and unnatural. This isn't true of all music with lots of production, though, as you should know that I do listen to some music that has lots of production. In fact, Neurosis is one band that is very produced on record. That being said. That song really sucks ass. But you can't expect to show people music and only want to hear good and positive, sensitive comments about it. There are three reasons to show other people music: Actually, I had lost all expectations for responses after the having received few replies. I had even began to believe that nobody bothered listening to anything that I had posted, thus I posted less often. However, I am completely fine with option A as long as your replies are at respectful and charitable. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on Jun 1, 2010 16:05:40 GMT -8
I don't even care remotely enough about this to continue.
EDIT: I will respond to this because it needs clarification:
"I don't understand this 'crutch to listening to music.' On the contrary, I believe that production is largely secondary to the quality of the music. I can listen past the production aesthetics of pretty much anything. However, when it comes to 'finely' produced music, it isn't so much the production itself that turns me off. Instead, over produced (I'm fine with what I deem finely produced) music gives me the sense that the music itself is contrived, overwrought, and unnatural. This isn't true of all music with lots of production, though, as you should know that I do listen to some music that has lots of production. In fact, Neurosis is one band that is very produced on record."
I had not assumed that the you actually didn't listen to "finely produced" music, which I would use to describe music that isn't overproduced, nor is like that "lo-fi, garage band ambience" sound that I had earlier addressed, which is most of the music I hear you listen to, hence the assumption. So thanks for the clarification. I too believe that the quality of music is more important than its production, never implied otherwise, so I'm glad you also see past that crutch, and admit that that attribute could be used against me, but it wouldn't be the only reason. You started off that paragraph rather confusingly, because with your response it shows that you do actually understand the 'crutch to enjoying music statement'.
"Yeah, I pretty much disagree with all of this elitist perspective. Rather, I believe that a greater knowledge of music, however that is defined, allows a person to have a more specific understanding of their own tastes but does not significantly change them, aside from aspects that are secondary to the original qualities that they are attracted to."
This statement in no way contradicts or opposes my apparent "elitest perspective". Also, I highly agree with what you said... and don't think I ever suggested something that implied otherwise. In fact, my statement was very vague. It almost makes your response irrelevant, not trying to be mean about it. But I highly agree with it. Once again, I ask you to remember things I have spoken about in person, unless somehow those are irrelevant to the boards, or personal conversation is unimportant.
Also, the sentence "Yeah, I pretty much disagree with all of this elitist perspective" really wanted me to say "Says the elitist." That's an issue you can discuss in private if you so wish.
By the way, remember that I said I like pushing people's buttons to know more about them.
|
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on Jun 1, 2010 18:36:17 GMT -8
I say it's an elitist perspective not as a pejorative, as I am sure you consider it of me, but because that's what it is: you believe that a meritorious selection of people with training and experience in the subject of music have better taste in music than those who do not. Though it's not particularly democratic, that doesn't necessarily mean that it is wrong. For instance I would say that a historian is more credible of a source to speak upon past events than a person who hadn't studied history. Essentially, that is justified elitism. However, I disagree with it not because of that but because I believe musical taste to be something that precedes knowledge of music. Thus, taste in music is not qualified by knowledge of music, it only articulates one's taste for one's self. This does not agree with saying talking about the enlightenment of good taste, or whatever.
Also I didn't understand 'crutch to listening to music' because it implies that listening to music is difficult, maybe a crutch for judging music but that is a different thing.
I don't particularly remember which personal conversations you are referring to. I don't think they are unimportant but they aren't readily available to memory and I still tend to change my mind on the topic of quality.
Anyway, I don't mind that you don't like the song. That's completely fair. However, barbs, whether they were intended or not, do hurt. Though you might not remotely care, I do value what you think.
|
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on Jun 1, 2010 21:04:45 GMT -8
Anyway, here's another song from the same band that you might like more. Neurosis - "A Sun That Never Sets" www.youtube.com/watch?v=puG607ho7TYBut, yeah, I generally like metal that has lots of diverging and resolving guitar textures and tons. Dissonant, I know, but I like that. Metal, to me, should be cacophonous as to elicit unpleasant emotions. In that way, it is cathartic. |
|
