How you define classic?

It sets a standard, is of high quality (not in terms of opinion, as in everything is mastered and such), appeals to many audiences, and has a very high replay value.

Something that's dope, that I can bump years from now. It doesn't have to be perfect, and it doesn't have to re-invent the wheel, but it has to be something that's accessible, dope, and has longevity.

 An album I can listen to withouthout skipping any tracks, 1-3 at most. production and lyrics must be nothing short of good. 

1) quality

2) influence/impact
Orlando_Magic

Furthermore, you can say an album that's exposed to the mainstream has a certain amount of impact/influence for the simple fact that it gets to a wide variety of exposure...but exposure to the mainstream doesn't change the music. Biggie's "Ready To Die" isn't necessairly a better album than Big L's "Lifest.ylez Ov Da Poor & Dangerous" because Biggie's had a bigger culture impact.

And my big thing about influence/impact, is that none of it changes the music. Nas can make "Illmatic" and everyone can bite his flow, and his st.yle but that doesn't make "Illmatic" a cl.assic...putting AZ on your album because Nas did it, doesn't make your album a cl.assic; mimmicking his flow on "It Ain't Hard To Tell" doesn't make your song "Shake Your Booty" a cl.assic joint. Track 7-10 don't become 1,000 times better because your album went platnium...and they most certainly don't become better because Lil' Jay and all of his friends were influenced by it.

Replay value.

Quality.

[QUOTE="Orlando_Magic"]1) quality

2) influence/impact
Colt45fool

Furthermore, you can say an album that's exposed to the mainstream has a certain amount of impact/influence for the simple fact that it gets to a wide variety of exposure...but exposure to the mainstream doesn't change the music. Biggie's "Ready To Die" isn't necessairly a better album than Big L's "Lifest.ylez Ov Da Poor & Dangerous" because Biggie's had a bigger culture impact.

And my big thing about influence/impact, is that none of it changes the music. Nas can make "Illmatic" and everyone can bite his flow, and his st.yle but that doesn't make "Illmatic" a cl.assic...putting AZ on your album because Nas did it, doesn't make your album a cl.assic; mimmicking his flow on "It Ain't Hard To Tell" doesn't make your song "Shake Your Booty" a cl.assic joint. Influence/Impact has nothing to do with the music, outside of it inspired someone. T-Pain sounded dope on song X with autotune, doesn't mean you'll sound dope on song Y with autotune.

An artist can release an album that has notable impact on their region or sub-genre of their particular genre of music, regardless of whether to that day, time, and place, that c|assic is considered or defined as one of another genre or sub-genre, being that if it is of the former that it is termed as a cross-over, be of the whole album or a song or two songs from that album. When the song is on an album, one might consider the album as a whole c|assic, and not that one song, as with the advancement of the digital age, and this has been commented on many times both here and in professional articles ranging from e-magazines, physical magazines, and big newspapers, that the LP has lost its power as a single album, where each song works with the other songs in a certain order to be played as determined by the artist, and now has become more of a blend of multiple songs, each sounding more like the others, where occasionally many could be singles, and where mostly only the singles are worth listening to. For that reason, I would say no "joint" or "track" or "song" or "single" can be c|assic. Only an album can be c|assic. Now back to the definition of c|assic. 

Though an album may be defined as cross-over due to its diverse c|assic, it is merely an advancement, or progression, or if you wish to deem so, an upgrade to the sound of that region or sub-genre of the particular genre of music being analyzed. That being stated, it is only through its impact on the region or sub-genre that it belongs to that one may measure the importance of it, and not its quality, when measured on a spectrum of high to low. Though high quality makes masterpieces, it can be stated that only after that quality has been measured and compared to others of its kind that it, being the subject, can be called a masterpiece, or c|assic . If a tree falls in the middle of the woods and there is nobody around to hear it, did the tree fall? It does not matter how large, dense, or tall the tree is, or whether it takes down a whole forest of trees with it. The question is, do I know that it ever fell if nobody ever saw it fall, hear it fall, or saw its impact? The answer to that question, one that I am sure you and anybody else who takes the time to read, reason, and contemplate over my words will surmise is that I will never know that it, the tree, fell. Why else do we as humanity constantly discover masterpieces of ours and others' societies buried in the Earth, in paintings, buildings, ancient relics, and music, prose, and sculpture? You see now, I hope, that it does not matter how good the music at hand is - it only matters that people are there to listen to it. So now how do I measure c|assic?

C|assic is, in musical terms, modern at most and particular to Hip Hop/Rap, defined by the quality of an album when heard by a substantial set of people, where that set may not be defined by race, skin tint/shade, or hair-sty|e "So what about what you said up in the second paragraph?", you ask me now. Well what about it? So well what if an album is of terrible quality? So what if that album has a substantial listening scope and therefore is understood to be mainstream, or at the least has the sound of what is popular with the mainstream, and though is understood by some to be underground, really is mainstream as it is the music and not the people that makes the music what it is. When dealing with albums that are not of high quality, one has to presume that album still has quality. There is no album to my knowledge without quality. If an album does not have quality, it may be considered either a. non-existant or b. unheard of (no pun intended). For b, one may refer to my tree in the woods analogy. Underground or alternative albums of high quality may be c|assic to their respective sub-genre, and not to the genre as a whole when measured by the majority of that mainstream genre's listening group. It is still c|assic to that genre and sub-genre, but is un-recognized. Any album of any quality with any listening group may then, as long as its impact is notable by a significant amount of people, be considered c|assic.

Let me restate my definition so those who believe me to be rambling, to which I am not, and those who have not read or taken the time or fully read and understand each word and why I have placed each word where I have can understand; c|assic is, in musical terms, modern at most and particular to Hip Hop/Rap, defined by the quality of an album when heard by a substantial set of people, where that set may not be defined by race, skin tint/shade, or hair-sty|e.

For the above reasoning, I agree with Orlando_Magic. I disagree on some level with Colt45fool. This has taken me an hour and a half to formulate, and so those who have read this, I thank you. I would like, if possible, for my definition to be stickied, and if need be, I can repost what is said in this reply (new message). You now have been educated.

If you did not read this, you really are missing out and probably will post or ask or discuss the meaning of the term "c|assic" again in the near or far future. I do not feel sorry for you. 

1- consistent quality between tracks

2- cohesive theme/sound between tracks

3- longevity

How can't a song be a classic joint? To me, a song that belongs on a classic album = a classic joint. Blackstar's K.O.S. (Determination) is a CLASSIC joint, but I think that Blackstar album is above average.

I don't really understand how you're disagreeing with me...I mean, I see the influence factor you're placing on the set of people that have heard the album, but what about the people that plan on making new music, based on that album? If T-Pain drops three decent albums, and then Kanye West comes out with 808s & Heartbreaks and it's a disaster via critics, and listeners alike, does that mean that it's a classic album?

I mean, calling an album a classic is somewhat subjective in its own right, and that seems to be your point, but it's also objective. Some albums are just bad, and it doesn't matter if 20 people think it's a classic. If everyone in OTB said Nastradamus was awful, and elpooz said Nastradamus was the GOAT, it influenced, and inspired him to want to rap, and it's his favorite rap album ever, that doesn't mean that Nastradamus is a classic--it's still awful, and elpooz probably just has ****ty taste.

How can't a song be a classic joint? To me, a song that belongs on a classic album = a classic joint. Blackstar's K.O.S. (Determination) is a CLASSIC joint, but I think that Blackstar album is above average.

I don't really understand how you're disagreeing with me...I mean, I see the influence factor you're placing on the set of people that have heard the album, but what about the people that plan on making new music, based on that album? If T-Pain drops three decent albums, and then Kanye West comes out with 808s & Heartbreaks and it's a disaster via critics, and listeners alike, does that mean that it's a classic album?

I mean, calling an album a classic is somewhat subjective in its own right, and that seems to be your point, but it's also objective. Some albums are just bad, and it doesn't matter if 20 people think it's a classic. If everyone in OTB said Nastradamus was awful, and elpooz said Nastradamus was the GOAT, it influenced, and inspired him to want to rap, and it's his favorite rap album ever, that doesn't mean that Nastradamus is a classic--it's still awful, and elpooz probably just has ****ty taste.

Colt45fool

Elpooz is not a set of people, OTB is not a substantial group of people, Nastradamus is awful when compared to Illmatic but not comparing it to only other NaS albums or NaS's potential is still a great album, and Kanye West is not the one with the influence - T-Pain is the one with the influence. Because of T-Pain's influence, he can now be considered influencing. Whether his first Auto-Tune album influences a substantial set of people is yet to be determined. No matter how bad, even if the world forever considered and will consider it terrible, the first Rock & Roll album will still be c|assic by my definition, as will the first Hip Hop/Rap album. Before those great influential albums came other albums of varying quality, perhaps not even close to the "first" of the new genre, but adopting an adapted sty|e in at least one track that the new genre's sound was influenced by. Would one consider that album then the first? No. It is not influential enough. Is it good? Is it of extremely high quality? Perhaps. Perhaps then it may be considered c|assic as well. So then if Elpooz, you might argue, has a huge following and many other artists are doing the same thing he is, and maybe even a whole sub-genre is created, and perhaps the following becomes large enough, and over much time, becomes it's own musical genre, will Nastradamus be determined to be c|assic under my definition? No. It simply is not of enough quality as a Mainstream East Coast Hip Hop/Rap album. Now if Elpooz were to have said the whole album was his influence, and all of the other artists said it was their influence, or even if there were no other artists but a whole culture was created by the album, then in that case Nastradamus would be c|assic.

For WizengamotX.bradleybhoy

Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all his sentences short, or that he avoid all detail and treat his subjects only in outline, but that every word tell.

— William Strunk Jr.
in Elements of Sty|e

Being that William Strunk Jr.'s Elements of Sty|e is not very important, I will let you know before we start that it is not a c|assic book. So I have spent the necessary two seconds to click on your link and read the paragraph, taken another minute or three to type this, and will let you this: Whether each word tells is subjective; all opinions depend on the person reading or looking or tasting or hearing or feeling. You need a large group of people to make that opinion "fact". The same goes for science. I hope you are aware that we as humanity know absolutely zero about the human body, medicine, and the chemicals we deal with on a daily basis. We know only that our opinions, guesses, or hypotheses will you put it (all is a matter of symantics, work with what we are doing, work with other opinions, or are created to make certain/those opinions make sense to our mind, or to others. There must be others or otherwise there is nothing but you and your opinion, for which you are wise and to nobody is better. 

For my opinion, here you go. I am not sorry you missed my words. 

[QUOTE="Colt45fool"]

[QUOTE="Orlando_Magic"]1) quality

2) influence/impact
WizengamotX

Furthermore, you can say an album that's exposed to the mainstream has a certain amount of impact/influence for the simple fact that it gets to a wide variety of exposure...but exposure to the mainstream doesn't change the music. Biggie's "Ready To Die" isn't necessairly a better album than Big L's "Lifest.ylez Ov Da Poor & Dangerous" because Biggie's had a bigger culture impact.

And my big thing about influence/impact, is that none of it changes the music. Nas can make "Illmatic" and everyone can bite his flow, and his st.yle but that doesn't make "Illmatic" a cl.assic...putting AZ on your album because Nas did it, doesn't make your album a cl.assic; mimmicking his flow on "It Ain't Hard To Tell" doesn't make your song "Shake Your Booty" a cl.assic joint. Influence/Impact has nothing to do with the music, outside of it inspired someone. T-Pain sounded dope on song X with autotune, doesn't mean you'll sound dope on song Y with autotune.

Let me restate my definition so those who believe me to be rambling, to which I am not, and those who have not read or taken the time or fully read and understand each word and why I have placed each word where I have can understand; c|assic is, in musical terms, modern at most and particular to Hip Hop/Rap, defined by the quality of an album when heard by a substantial set of people, where that set may not be defined by race, skin tint/shade, or hair-sty|e.

If you did not read this, you really are missing out and probably will post or ask or discuss the meaning of the term "c|assic" again in the near or far future. I do not feel sorry for you. 

Your writing style is seriously long winded and littered with grammatical errors. You put that defintion of classic in front of a college/university marker and you might be pretty shocked by the mark you get back.

Your writing style is seriously long winded and littered with grammatical errors. You put that defintion of classic in front of a college/university marker and you might be pretty shocked by the mark you get back.

bradleybhoy

For something as casual as an internet forum, I would have hoped at least you would understand at the age you are that sentences are not meant to be as one would write in a professional novel or school journal, but as one would talk in a fresh air exchange. Yes, my dialogue when typing online is much more formal than that when talking vocally, but it is much less formalized and formulated, time-wise, than my serious work. You might then be shocked by what my mind can produce when I take the time and effort thereby to create, with words, an essay, poem, or any other type of prose, including works intended to be spoken such as songs, speeches, and similar pieces. Conversations are not limited to the rules of writing. If I read to you out loud the dialogue which above I typed, it would take me no more time than it would one when speaking to a friend about any other topic. You also might be shocked by the reality that writing, formal and otherwise, is also not limited to the rules of writing. Now how does that make sense? To artists, the term is "artistic license". To writers, the term is either "freedom of the press" or "expression". To you, I would call it kiss my. And you can start your sentences with the words "and" and "but", you can write a three word sentence, a thousand page sentence, and a one sentence paragraph, and you can write. Like. This. All aforementioned things "you can" are within the conventions of writing, would be published, and would recieve top marks on an exam in any institution or school, and would also recieve top marks as a college paper. If anything, in college - real college, mind you - my definition is not long enough. Try looking up "term paper" or "end-year thesis". By the way, if you are English, then your conventions of grammar, spelling, and really definition as well, are all different from one whose upbringing took place in the United States, where a fanny pack is your bum bag, words with "re" are spelled with "er", and "quotes contain the punctuation."

Its just funny how you seem to think your definition of classic the 'be all and end all' and that anyone would consider stickying it when it is written in a most tedious, pretentious style and your none too original or profound arguments are articulated so poorly because of it.

I gather you're not in college yet and like I said, you'll get a shock. Unless you're in creative writing you're likely to get below average grades if you don't use correct grammar and write concisely.

1) quality

2) influence/impact
Orlando_Magic

Word.

Its just funny how you seem to think your definition of classic the 'be all and end all' and that anyone would consider stickying it when it is written in a most tedious, pretentious style and your none too original or profound arguments are articulated so poorly because of it.

I gather you're not in college yet and like I said, you'll get a shock. Unless you're in creative writing you're likely to get below average grades if you don't use correct grammar and write concisely.

bradleybhoy

You wrote this after your definition of classic

"You now have been educated.

If you did not read this, you really are missing out and probably will post or ask or discuss the meaning of the term "c|assic" again in the near or far future. I do not feel sorry for you."

Excuse me if I detected some douchebag in your tone there.

You wrote this after your definition of classic

"You now have been educated.

If you did not read this, you really are missing out and probably will post or ask or discuss the meaning of the term "c|assic" again in the near or far future. I do not feel sorry for you."

Excuse me if I detected some douchebag in your tone there.

bradleybhoy

No worries. Now you know I am not. I hope things can be chill between you and me. I only typed as much as I did because I was trying to explain something in each case - be either defending myself or defining a concept. Explaining requires elaboration, something which you know I have done very well. If I did not elaborate on my ideas, I would then be leaving room for others to elaborate on my ideas, and that would not be too fun then, now would it?

I dont know how I would define a classic. This thread reminds of something Phonte said in the beginning of "Never Enough". Dont know why though.

"Dope beats, dope rhymes, this rap thing aint really that hard"

I think The Infamous by Mobb Deep is a perfect example of a classic. Really good production on every song, theyre lyrics were tight the whole time, they had seamless story telling. But I guess the overall dark tone of the album is what got me hooked. You could tell thats what they were aiming for.

Thats a perfect album to me.

[QUOTE="bradleybhoy"]

You wrote this after your definition of classic

"You now have been educated.

If you did not read this, you really are missing out and probably will post or ask or discuss the meaning of the term "c|assic" again in the near or far future. I do not feel sorry for you."

Excuse me if I detected some douchebag in your tone there.

WizengamotX

No worries. Now you know I am not. I hope things can be chill between you and me. I only typed as much as I did because I was trying to explain something in each case - be either defending myself or defining a concept. Explaining requires elaboration, something which you know I have done very well. If I did not elaborate on my ideas, I would then be leaving room for others to elaborate on my ideas, and that would not be too fun then, now would it?

Well I don't know you're not a douhebag and I still think the writing style of your defintion is unecessarly laborious but whatever. I hate this petty online BS so I'll just let it slide.

I dont know how I would define a classic. This thread reminds of something Phonte said in the beginning of "Never Enough". Dont know why though.

"Dope beats, dope rhymes, this rap thing aint really that hard"

I think The Infamous by Mobb Deep is a perfect example of a classic. Really good production on every song, theyre lyrics were tight the whole time, they had seamless story telling. But I guess the overall dark tone of the album is what got me hooked. You could tell thats what they were aiming for.

Thats a perfect album to me.

MellowMight

What about Ready to Die? I agree with you on The Infamous by the way.

[QUOTE="WizengamotX"][QUOTE="bradleybhoy"]

You wrote this after your definition of classic

"You now have been educated.

If you did not read this, you really are missing out and probably will post or ask or discuss the meaning of the term "c|assic" again in the near or far future. I do not feel sorry for you."

Excuse me if I detected some douchebag in your tone there.

bradleybhoy

No worries. Now you know I am not. I hope things can be chill between you and me. I only typed as much as I did because I was trying to explain something in each case - be either defending myself or defining a concept. Explaining requires elaboration, something which you know I have done very well. If I did not elaborate on my ideas, I would then be leaving room for others to elaborate on my ideas, and that would not be too fun then, now would it?

Well I don't know you're not a douhebag and I still think the writing style of your defintion is unecessarly laborious but whatever. I hate this petty online BS so I'll just let it slide.

aight thanks b

[QUOTE="MellowMight"]

I dont know how I would define a classic. This thread reminds of something Phonte said in the beginning of "Never Enough". Dont know why though.

"Dope beats, dope rhymes, this rap thing aint really that hard"

I think The Infamous by Mobb Deep is a perfect example of a classic. Really good production on every song, theyre lyrics were tight the whole time, they had seamless story telling. But I guess the overall dark tone of the album is what got me hooked. You could tell thats what they were aiming for.

Thats a perfect album to me.

WizengamotX

What about Ready to Die? I agree with you on The Infamous by the way.

That too, but two reasons I didnt mention it.

1. I honestly like The Infamous more.
2. Mentioning Ready To Die just has a generic, cliche steez to me lol.

[QUOTE="WizengamotX"][QUOTE="MellowMight"]

I dont know how I would define a classic. This thread reminds of something Phonte said in the beginning of "Never Enough". Dont know why though.

"Dope beats, dope rhymes, this rap thing aint really that hard"

I think The Infamous by Mobb Deep is a perfect example of a classic. Really good production on every song, theyre lyrics were tight the whole time, they had seamless story telling. But I guess the overall dark tone of the album is what got me hooked. You could tell thats what they were aiming for.

Thats a perfect album to me.

MellowMight

What about Ready to Die? I agree with you on The Infamous by the way.

That too, but two reasons I didnt mention it.

1. I honestly like The Infamous more.
2. Mentioning Ready To Die just has a generic, cliche steez to me lol.

Yeah I feel you on that one, but point two - it only is that way because it is such a great album. Still, I get your points nice and clear.

[QUOTE="MellowMight"][QUOTE="WizengamotX"][QUOTE="MellowMight"]

I dont know how I would define a classic. This thread reminds of something Phonte said in the beginning of "Never Enough". Dont know why though.

"Dope beats, dope rhymes, this rap thing aint really that hard"

I think The Infamous by Mobb Deep is a perfect example of a classic. Really good production on every song, theyre lyrics were tight the whole time, they had seamless story telling. But I guess the overall dark tone of the album is what got me hooked. You could tell thats what they were aiming for.

Thats a perfect album to me.

WizengamotX

What about Ready to Die? I agree with you on The Infamous by the way.

That too, but two reasons I didnt mention it.

1. I honestly like The Infamous more.
2. Mentioning Ready To Die just has a generic, cliche steez to me lol.

Yeah I feel you on that one, but point two - it only is that way because it is such a great album. Still, I get your points nice and clear.

Thanks.

Lyrics that you can relate to depending on your mood.

Instrumentals - catchy/diverse

Replayability.

"Being that William Strunk Jr.'s Elements of ****is not very important, I will let you know before we start that it is not a ****c book." - WizengamotX

Are you ****ing serious? Dude, you've obviously never been in strenuous writing course because Strunk and White's Element of st*yle is the basis of good writing. 

[QUOTE="Colt45fool"]

How can't a song be a classic joint? To me, a song that belongs on a classic album = a classic joint. Blackstar's K.O.S. (Determination) is a CLASSIC joint, but I think that Blackstar album is above average.

I don't really understand how you're disagreeing with me...I mean, I see the influence factor you're placing on the set of people that have heard the album, but what about the people that plan on making new music, based on that album? If T-Pain drops three decent albums, and then Kanye West comes out with 808s & Heartbreaks and it's a disaster via critics, and listeners alike, does that mean that it's a classic album?

I mean, calling an album a classic is somewhat subjective in its own right, and that seems to be your point, but it's also objective. Some albums are just bad, and it doesn't matter if 20 people think it's a classic. If everyone in OTB said Nastradamus was awful, and elpooz said Nastradamus was the GOAT, it influenced, and inspired him to want to rap, and it's his favorite rap album ever, that doesn't mean that Nastradamus is a classic--it's still awful, and elpooz probably just has ****ty taste.

WizengamotX

Elpooz is not a set of people, OTB is not a substantial group of people, Nastradamus is awful when compared to Illmatic but not comparing it to only other NaS albums or NaS's potential is still a great album, and Kanye West is not the one with the influence - T-Pain is the one with the influence. Because of T-Pain's influence, he can now be considered influencing. Whether his first Auto-Tune album influences a substantial set of people is yet to be determined. No matter how bad, even if the world forever considered and will consider it terrible, the first Rock & Roll album will still be c|assic by my definition, as will the first Hip Hop/Rap album. Before those great influential albums came other albums of varying quality, perhaps not even close to the "first" of the new genre, but adopting an adapted sty|e in at least one track that the new genre's sound was influenced by. Would one consider that album then the first? No. It is not influential enough. Is it good? Is it of extremely high quality? Perhaps. Perhaps then it may be considered c|assic as well. So then if Elpooz, you might argue, has a huge following and many other artists are doing the same thing he is, and maybe even a whole sub-genre is created, and perhaps the following becomes large enough, and over much time, becomes it's own musical genre, will Nastradamus be determined to be c|assic under my definition? No. It simply is not of enough quality as a Mainstream East Coast Hip Hop/Rap album. Now if Elpooz were to have said the whole album was his influence, and all of the other artists said it was their influence, or even if there were no other artists but a whole culture was created by the album, then in that case Nastradamus would be c|assic.

So if Nastradamus and all of its suckiness created a culture of suckiness, then Nastradamus would be considered a classic? That logic is absolutely retarded. Let's say snap-rappers make a culture, and are criticized by 98% of the world for making anything BUT a classic rap album....in fact, these critics aren't even calling what they made music. Let's say the first snap-rap album was D4L's debut...and lets say you're from the south, and this album is so influential to you, and others that it creates a regional phenomenon (aka a culture) and leads you, and your friends Lil' Jay, and Lil' Snappy to go create a snap rap album three years later. Is D4L's snap rap debut now a classic? It's the first snap-rap album in our example, its influence created a culture of snap-rap fiends in your area, and it's influenced a culture by your definition. If you say it is, then I think that's ****ing stupid.

My point: No matter how much something influences people, some music is just bad, and will never be considered a classic. Music isn't solely subjective, and if a good amount of people like an album/are influenced by it/all of those other thing you're saying it needs to be a classic, that does not mean it's a classic album. The influence or impact something has does NOT change the music. It doesn't make track 8 doper, it doesn't make the artist pick a different beat for track 3, and it doesn't make the artist flow better on track 17. Somewhere in your set of run-on sentences, and sounding smart for the sake of sounding smart, you've seemed to have lost track on what my arguement is. Quite frankly, I'm still not sure about your arguement, because it keeps contradicting itself.

"c|assic is, in musical terms, modern at most and particular to Hip Hop/Rap, defined by the quality of an album when heard by a substantial set of people, where that set may not be defined by race, skin tint/shade, or hair-sty|e."

Da ****...man that sounds like a whole lotta nothing. What the hell does that even mean dude? A ****c is defined by the quality of an album when heard by a substantial set of people? First of what constitutes a substantial amount of people and how does that in any way affect the quality of an album. The volume of listeners has NO affect on an album's quality and saying it does really makes me think you either worded your definition poorly or that you are completely clueless.

It seems to me that you are saying that when an album is heard by a large group of people, its status as a ****c is defined by its quality, but that also means quality is irrelevant when an album has NOT been heard by a substantial amount of people. So basically, being a ****c album has jack ish to due with the quality of an album and has more to do with how many people listen to the album.

To me, that answer sucks bawls because it devalues quality in favor of what is popular. Someone could create the best album ever, but if it is not a popular then in your system it is not a ****c. That is really dissatisfying imo...

"c|assic is, in musical terms, modern at most and particular to Hip Hop/Rap, defined by the quality of an album when heard by a substantial set of people, where that set may not be defined by race, skin tint/shade, or hair-sty|e."

Da ****...man that sounds like a whole lotta nothing. What the hell does that even mean dude? A ****c is defined by the quality of an album when heard by a substantial set of people? First of what constitutes a substantial amount of people and how does that in any way affect the quality of an album. The volume of listeners has NO affect on an album's quality and saying it does really makes me think you either worded your definition poorly or that you are completely clueless.

It seems to me that you are saying that when an album is heard by a large group of people, its status as a ****c is defined by its quality, but that also means quality is irrelevant when an album has NOT been heard by a substantial amount of people. So basically, being a ****c album has jack ish to due with the quality of an album and has more to do with how many people listen to the album.

To me, that answer sucks bawls because it devalues quality in favor of what is popular. Someone could create the best album ever, but if it is not a popular then in your system it is not a ****c. That is really dissatisfying imo...

fat_rob

Colt...please don't insult Shakespeare by comparing his writing to Wize's, kthxbye :)fat_rob

[QUOTE="fat_rob"]Colt...please don't insult Shakespeare by comparing his writing to Wize's, kthxbye :)Colt45fool

well your boy has only been in school for fifteen years...I need to read more :(

well your boy has only been in school for fifteen years...I need to read more :(

Colt45fool

Honestly, I don't understand the whole "test of time" criteria. I think longevity is an overrated aspect because it all depends on how often you listen to the album. It is also completely subjective in so far that some people just don't like older sounding things. I have trouble listening to Run-DMC and the Beasties because the style of rap sounds so static and stale when compared to rap made after Rakim and KRS-One, but others would consider Run and the Beasties to be "timeless" acts.

I think the idea of rap music being timeless is not possible because of the style of the genre. Rappers always shout out years and use current pop culture references. In 100 years, the Jay-Z line "I'm like Heath Ledger, even if I overdose on drugs, mofos couldn't kill my buzz" will lose most if not all of it's stinging power. 

If by longevity you mean remains popular, then I really dislike that being a measure for a classic album.

IDK, somebody explain the whole test of time thing too me...

Classic = timeless.

Regardless of what you thought, felt, knew when you first heard the song...if all that changes and you're still listening to it when you have grandchildren, that's a ****c you have on your hands. Even if those thoughts and feelings change and it brings you back to the ones you had when first hearing the song, I'd say that's a ****c. Music is emotional, and if you create that attachment...I'm thinking that's some ****c ****. I still get goosebumps listening to my favorite songs of all time.-Twilight-

read mah mind

[QUOTE="Colt45fool"][QUOTE="fat_rob"]Colt...please don't insult Shakespeare by comparing his writing to Wize's, kthxbye :)fat_rob

Shakespeare is a genius.

I'm close reading Hamlet right now for next semster. Its lucky we did it in high school and our teacher thoroughly explained it to us. :lol:

[QUOTE="WizengamotX"][QUOTE="Colt45fool"]

How can't a song be a classic joint? To me, a song that belongs on a classic album = a classic joint. Blackstar's K.O.S. (Determination) is a CLASSIC joint, but I think that Blackstar album is above average.

I don't really understand how you're disagreeing with me...I mean, I see the influence factor you're placing on the set of people that have heard the album, but what about the people that plan on making new music, based on that album? If T-Pain drops three decent albums, and then Kanye West comes out with 808s & Heartbreaks and it's a disaster via critics, and listeners alike, does that mean that it's a classic album?

I mean, calling an album a classic is somewhat subjective in its own right, and that seems to be your point, but it's also objective. Some albums are just bad, and it doesn't matter if 20 people think it's a classic. If everyone in OTB said Nastradamus was awful, and elpooz said Nastradamus was the GOAT, it influenced, and inspired him to want to rap, and it's his favorite rap album ever, that doesn't mean that Nastradamus is a classic--it's still awful, and elpooz probably just has ****ty taste.

Colt45fool

Elpooz is not a set of people, OTB is not a substantial group of people, Nastradamus is awful when compared to Illmatic but not comparing it to only other NaS albums or NaS's potential is still a great album, and Kanye West is not the one with the influence - T-Pain is the one with the influence. Because of T-Pain's influence, he can now be considered influencing. Whether his first Auto-Tune album influences a substantial set of people is yet to be determined. No matter how bad, even if the world forever considered and will consider it terrible, the first Rock & Roll album will still be c|assic by my definition, as will the first Hip Hop/Rap album. Before those great influential albums came other albums of varying quality, perhaps not even close to the "first" of the new genre, but adopting an adapted sty|e in at least one track that the new genre's sound was influenced by. Would one consider that album then the first? No. It is not influential enough. Is it good? Is it of extremely high quality? Perhaps. Perhaps then it may be considered c|assic as well. So then if Elpooz, you might argue, has a huge following and many other artists are doing the same thing he is, and maybe even a whole sub-genre is created, and perhaps the following becomes large enough, and over much time, becomes it's own musical genre, will Nastradamus be determined to be c|assic under my definition? No. It simply is not of enough quality as a Mainstream East Coast Hip Hop/Rap album. Now if Elpooz were to have said the whole album was his influence, and all of the other artists said it was their influence, or even if there were no other artists but a whole culture was created by the album, then in that case Nastradamus would be c|assic.

So if Nastradamus and all of its suckiness created a culture of suckiness, then Nastradamus would be considered a classic? That logic is absolutely retarded. Let's say snap-rappers make a culture, and are criticized by 98% of the world for making anything BUT a classic rap album....in fact, these critics aren't even calling what they made music. Let's say the first snap-rap album was D4L's debut...and lets say you're from the south, and this album is so influential to you, and others that it creates a regional phenomenon (aka a culture) and leads you, and your friends Lil' Jay, and Lil' Snappy to go create a snap rap album three years later. Is D4L's snap rap debut now a classic? It's the first snap-rap album in our example, its influence created a culture of snap-rap fiends in your area, and it's influenced a culture by your definition. If you say it is, then I think that's ****ing stupid.

My point: No matter how much something influences people, some music is just bad, and will never be considered a classic. Music isn't solely subjective, and if a good amount of people like an album/are influenced by it/all of those other thing you're saying it needs to be a classic, that does not mean it's a classic album. The influence or impact something has does NOT change the music. It doesn't make track 8 doper, it doesn't make the artist pick a different beat for track 3, and it doesn't make the artist flow better on track 17. Somewhere in your set of run-on sentences, and sounding smart for the sake of sounding smart, you've seemed to have lost track on what my arguement is. Quite frankly, I'm still not sure about your arguement, because it keeps contradicting itself.

To the snap-rap argument: If snap-rap becomes its own genre with a substantial amount of people listening to it, such that where a culture is created from it, just as R&B/ Disco had its own thing, and just as R&B/ Soul had its own thing, just as original Rock & Roll had its own thing. I mean a substantial amount of people, and this goes to fat_rob as well, where the amount of people is "countable" to the point where my neighbor's kids are singing snap-rap, my Dad is dressing snap-rap, and maybe, just maybe, I am out with my girlfriend buying presents for our annual snap-rap holiday, then yes. Yes. Yes. BUT if snap-rap is just a lame sub-genre of Southern Hip Hop/Rap and is thereby a sub-sub-genre of Hip Hop/Rap, with no influence on Hip Hop/Rap whatsoever, and that D4L album, just as in this reality, is terrible to most of the Hip Hop/Rap community, but is a classic not to the Southern Hip Hop/Rap community either, but only to the snap-rap populace, which for theory's sake is just me, Lil' Jay, Lil' Snappy, the Korean clerk at Seven Eleven down the street, and the coke head table dancer rooming downstairs, then no. No. No.

You say Hip Hop/Rap was formed from a multitude of sub-genres, where I am saying genres are formed from one sub-genre of a totally different genre. Upon becoming a separate genre, distinctive and large enough to be recognized as such, then that genre may be broken into different sub-genres based upon sty|e, which in the case of Hip Hop/ Rap is a regional difference, heavily influenced in some cases more than others by the distinctive cultures of those areas. In the case of Rock & Roll, as another example, it was formed from variations on Jazz and the pop (popular sub-genre) R&B of the day. Over time, it has become so large a genre that there are sub-sub-sub-genres of Rock & Roll, e.g. Deathcore Heavy Metal Rock & Roll, where Death Heavy Metal is combined with Metalcore Heavy Metal, thereby making Deathcore a sub-genre of both Death and Metalcore sub-genres of Heavy Metal (commonly known as simply "metal"), which itself is a huge sub-genre of Rock & Roll. I apoligize if this all confuses any of you, as I know you probably do not listen to these genres (I hate metal and never listen to any of it, by the way), but then again, Metalcore is also a sub-genre of Hardcore Punk Rock & Roll, a sub-genre of Punk Rock & Roll, which is itself a sub-genre of Rock & Roll. By one thread, Punk, Deathcore is a subx4-genre of Rock & Roll, and by the Heavy Metal thread, Deathcore is a subx3-genre of Rock & Roll. The reason why Heavy Metal is not it's own genre, though it is so large in following, influence, and years in existance, is because Rock & Roll is so firmly established and wide in its definition that Heavy Metal can never be too different from other Rock & Roll sub-genres without changing what makes it what it is - string instruments, percussion instruments, and vocal instruments, specifically guitars, drums, and vocals. I realize that Rock & Roll thing may seem a huge tangent from where we were going with "c|assic," but I thought it necessary to first establish what and why I use my definition of c|assic in terms of substantial amounts of people and with reference to sub-genres, genres, etc. Musical hierarchy and history can be very confusing if you do not use these terms, which only exist to explain the progression of music.

To fat_rob - a Hip Hop/ Rap response to your comment would be this. MC Hammer. You remember the dude. His third album, Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em, was the first hip-hop album certified diamond by the RIAA. So because it sold over ten million records, one could say it was popular, right? Well you said "So basically, being a ****c album has jack ish to due with the quality of an album and has more to do with how many people listen to the album." I do not mean that at all. Please refer to my previous paragraphs on quality, high quality, etc. and the difference between having quality and not, which is near impossible. Without divulging too much into the topic, as I have already extensively covered it, to many of you, your consternation, I will give you some idea again of what I mean. There needs to be a large amount, a substantial amount, a group of people whose proportion, also known as ratio, to the total number of people involved with the RIAA is a number far exceeding one, that think, or deem, an album to be of high quality in order for it to be considered, by my definition, high quality. Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em was taken terribly by critics, with whose reviews I agree for the most part, and therefore is not a c|assic, even though it was extremely popular, remaining to this day one of the best selling albums of all time for any genre by the RIAA. Yeah, there might be some dude somewhere that thinks Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em is really awesome and maybe, in his or her personal opinion, the album is a c|assic. Well that is that person's own opinion, and because they are alone, lonely, but not necessarily singular in their belief, but are not substantial enough to be heard and considered correct, then Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em remains only a popular album, and nothing more. That all taken into consideration, it could be argued that on the sole basis that Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em catapulted further the Hip Hop/Rap culture into pop and set up Dr. Dre's The Chronic and other albums for mass purchase and therefore influence, that it could be considered a c|assic - all because it is a landmark album for the genre. But that is up to debate and really I do not even know whether or not to call it c|assic. I just know I do not think it is a good album.

People tend to buy albums based upon critic responses and single popularity. Hammer's albums had great dance singles with catchy hooks, new themes to the time, and a P. Diddy for the eighties as the one creating them. N-Sync, Britney Spears, Linkin Park, and Lil' Wayne... hmph. Well didn't I say before that even if a sub-genre's listening group, a.k.a. fans of a sub-genre, not to be confused with a singular group, band, or artist, were to consider an album c|assic, that if that album was rejected by the majority of the main genre's listening group, that the album in question would then only be c|assic to that sub-genre, but not to the genre?

What I was trying to get at here, and I apoligize for the lengthy sentences and "walls o' text," is that whether something is of high or low quality may only be determined by popular belief. I said refer to my previous paragraphs on this all, and I still mean it. I believe I talked somewhat about hypothesis or scientific opinions versus scientific facts, and how fact is only determined by the popular belief that some opinion or educated guess is correct, usually only when convinced, and in the case of science and mathematics, by proofs? Well the same idea goes for music, and Hip Hop/Rap in particular as that is what OTB is about. If everybody thought Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em was c|assic and still do, then those critics can go nut off on each other, because it is the popular belief that matters. Why is it that critics can "go suck a dick" if they are not on spot with the community, e.g. a critic says Illmatic is the worst album in Hip Hop/Rap due to boring beats and pretentious lyrics, but when you all on OTB vote in underground albums such as O.C.'s Word... Life as c|assic that it is, just due to its high quality? What if some dude thinks D4L is high quality? Who are you to say it is not? Is it because most people think D4L is garbage? I would say so.

I think the main thing here is that people here, not just you, are trying to stay all "underground" and "high brow" about what is good and what is not, ignoring what is mainstream, without realizing that you need more than one person, more than two people, in fact a substantial amount of people to determine whether or not something is the way it is. As for the RIAA, and I hope you do not discount the other stuff in this paragraph just because I mentioned RIAA here, well the RIAA is what certifies things as platinum, etc. and so pertained to what I was talking about. I did not mean those members of the RIAA, but instead the charts that the RIAA compiles, counting sales regardless of label affiliation. In that way, the RIAA is directly tied to what is and is not popular in the world of music, ignoring bootlegging, sharing, and theft.

"because it is the popular belief that matters"

Nice fallacy buddy :|, btw scientific fact is not determined by popular belief...that's not even close to being true. That analogy is awful. Also, I don't know what you're talking about with all this sub-genre garbage, but you'd be hard pressed to prove to me that Lil' Wayne's last three efforts have been rejected by the majority of rap fans. 

And the RIAA is basically the industry jerking itself off and giving itself a pat on the back...nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't count units sold...it counts units SHIPPED. Soundscan counts units sold, so if you want to use counting sales, Soundscan is your benchmark...not the RIAA.