I don't believe it's possible to have "bad tastes" in music.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"] Yeah. So I like some Power Metal. Black Metal and Death Metal and alot of that other stuff, not so nice. Because at least in Power Metal, they try to not sound like crap when they sing.PannicAtack

How do you feel about this song?

hahah

Music is just sound arranged in a particular way. Diffrent styles appeal to diffrent people. If anyone honestly believes they have a better taste in music than anyone elsethey aresimply wrong. You can't tell people what they should enjoy, not everyone likes the same thing, and not everyone understands another persons chosen taste in music. So what if you don't like Miley Cirus? Other people do. Can you honestly outright say that they shouldn't listen to her music because you personally don't enjoy it? If I applied that to every piece of music I didn't like I would be hated universally, so how come forsome styles it becomes acceptable here? I don't like most metal music, and if I make a thread stating this then I will recieve a backlash. Could I honestly say the same if I were to make a thread on Miley Cyrus? It's a double standard.

I agree.... I like pretty much anything, and I get looked down upon for liking UK hardcore( dance electronica with the MC's, not the other hardcore scene) and liking metal/metalcore/post hardcore/hardcore/punk.

I dont care because I like all those genres.... but people always make comments about it. I dont think there is bad taste just preference

Music is just sound arranged in a particular way. Diffrent styles appeal to diffrent people. If anyone honestly believes they have a better taste in music than anyone elsethey aresimply wrong. You can't tell people what they should enjoy, not everyone likes the same thing, and not everyone understands another persons chosen taste in music. So what if you don't like Miley Cirus? Other people do. Can you honestly outright say that they shouldn't listen to her music because you personally don't enjoy it? If I applied that to every piece of music I didn't like I would be hated universally, so how come forsome styles it becomes acceptable here? I don't like most metal music, and if I make a thread stating this then I will recieve a backlash. Could I honestly say the same if I were to make a thread on Miley Cyrus? It's a double standard.

WasntAvailable

Music is just sound arranged in a particular way. Diffrent styles appeal to diffrent people. If anyone honestly believes they have a better taste in music than anyone elsethey aresimply wrong. You can't tell people what they should enjoy, not everyone likes the same thing, and not everyone understands another persons chosen taste in music. So what if you don't like Miley Cirus? Other people do. Can you honestly outright say that they shouldn't listen to her music because you personally don't enjoy it? If I applied that to every piece of music I didn't like I would be hated universally, so how come forsome styles it becomes acceptable here? I don't like most metal music, and if I make a thread stating this then I will recieve a backlash. Could I honestly say the same if I were to make a thread on Miley Cyrus? It's a double standard.

WasntAvailable

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

Music is just sound arranged in a particular way. Diffrent styles appeal to diffrent people. If anyone honestly believes they have a better taste in music than anyone elsethey aresimply wrong. You can't tell people what they should enjoy, not everyone likes the same thing, and not everyone understands another persons chosen taste in music. So what if you don't like Miley Cirus? Other people do. Can you honestly outright say that they shouldn't listen to her music because you personally don't enjoy it? If I applied that to every piece of music I didn't like I would be hated universally, so how come forsome styles it becomes acceptable here? I don't like most metal music, and if I make a thread stating this then I will recieve a backlash. Could I honestly say the same if I were to make a thread on Miley Cyrus? It's a double standard.

Hewkii

Yes it does. Can you use objective evidence to determine the quality of music? And no, simply stating someone has no talent is not objective in the slightest. It's still all opinionated.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

Music is just sound arranged in a particular way. Diffrent styles appeal to diffrent people. If anyone honestly believes they have a better taste in music than anyone elsethey aresimply wrong. You can't tell people what they should enjoy, not everyone likes the same thing, and not everyone understands another persons chosen taste in music. So what if you don't like Miley Cirus? Other people do. Can you honestly outright say that they shouldn't listen to her music because you personally don't enjoy it? If I applied that to every piece of music I didn't like I would be hated universally, so how come forsome styles it becomes acceptable here? I don't like most metal music, and if I make a thread stating this then I will recieve a backlash. Could I honestly say the same if I were to make a thread on Miley Cyrus? It's a double standard.

Darth-Caedus

You're confusing your own personal tastes in music with an imaginary universal standard of music. How well you can play an instrument is largely objective, but when it actually comes to performing with said instrument it's entirely subjective as to whether someone thinks it's good or not.

Can you use objective evidence to determine the quality of music?WasntAvailable

[QUOTE="Hewkii"][QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

Music is just sound arranged in a particular way. Diffrent styles appeal to diffrent people. If anyone honestly believes they have a better taste in music than anyone elsethey aresimply wrong. You can't tell people what they should enjoy, not everyone likes the same thing, and not everyone understands another persons chosen taste in music. So what if you don't like Miley Cirus? Other people do. Can you honestly outright say that they shouldn't listen to her music because you personally don't enjoy it? If I applied that to every piece of music I didn't like I would be hated universally, so how come forsome styles it becomes acceptable here? I don't like most metal music, and if I make a thread stating this then I will recieve a backlash. Could I honestly say the same if I were to make a thread on Miley Cyrus? It's a double standard.

WasntAvailable

Can you use objective evidence to determine the quality of music?

The only subjective factor of their music is if you think that that fact that its catchy is enough to like it.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]Can you use objective evidence to determine the quality of music?Hewkii

That's largely irrelevant when most music is heavily edited now anyway. Presuming the music comes out as was intended by the artist, then whether or not the music is good or not is entirely subjective, hence there is no real objective way of determining the quality of music. A good live performance is a diffrent matter entirely though, that's an issue with accuracy which dosn't apply to recorded songs.

[QUOTE="Hewkii"][QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

Music is just sound arranged in a particular way. Diffrent styles appeal to diffrent people. If anyone honestly believes they have a better taste in music than anyone elsethey aresimply wrong. You can't tell people what they should enjoy, not everyone likes the same thing, and not everyone understands another persons chosen taste in music. So what if you don't like Miley Cirus? Other people do. Can you honestly outright say that they shouldn't listen to her music because you personally don't enjoy it? If I applied that to every piece of music I didn't like I would be hated universally, so how come forsome styles it becomes acceptable here? I don't like most metal music, and if I make a thread stating this then I will recieve a backlash. Could I honestly say the same if I were to make a thread on Miley Cyrus? It's a double standard.

WasntAvailable

Yes it does. Can you use objective evidence to determine the quality of music? And no, simply stating someone has no talent is not objective in the slightest. It's still all opinionated.

That's largely irrelevant when most music is heavily edited now anyway. .

WasntAvailable

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

[QUOTE="Hewkii"] that doesn't mean there isn't objectively bad music.Darth-Caedus

Can you use objective evidence to determine the quality of music?

The only subjective factor of their music is if you think that that fact that its catchy is enough to like it.

Instrumental ability is irrelevant when the artist feels it isn't required for the song. Originality is also mostlysubjective. All music has to be diffrent in some wayotherwise someone gets sued, unless it's a cover (And I hate covers.). Example, I think mostmetal is derivative, you don't. See how that works? The subjective factor you mentioned is what determines out own tastes in music. That's why music is subjective.

Yeah, I don't believe in "bad taste." Taste is an opinion. t3hrubikscube

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

That's largely irrelevant when most music is heavily edited now anyway. .

Hewkii

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

[QUOTE="Hewkii"] that doesn't mean there isn't objectively bad music.homegirl2180

Yes it does. Can you use objective evidence to determine the quality of music? And no, simply stating someone has no talent is not objective in the slightest. It's still all opinionated.

Innovation, structure, profundity of lyrics, all subjective. Technical skill wont make a song better on it's own unless it's written into the song, and even that wont make it good. What your describing is your own subjective opinion on what you think makes good music, not what everyone thinks.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

That's largely irrelevant when most music is heavily edited now anyway. .

Hewkii

Terrible is an opinion, not a fact, opinions are subjective.

[QUOTE="Hewkii"][QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

That's largely irrelevant when most music is heavily edited now anyway. .

WasntAvailable

Terrible is an opinion, not a fact, opinions are subjective.

Dude just listen to wahtever you like, and don't let anyone change your opinions

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

[QUOTE="Hewkii"] autotuning doesn't really hide that you have a terrible voice.PannicAtack

Terrible is an opinion, not a fact, opinions are subjective.

You can't have something that's objectively bad unless it's applied to technology where it will affect whether something will or wont work. Music is more free than that, someone might find it terrible, another might find it awesome. You can't tell someone something is objectivelyawful just because it sounds terrible to you.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="Hewkii"] autotuning doesn't really hide that you have a terrible voice.Lilyanne46

Finally, someone who notices besides me. Here's a prime example of how auto-tune is annoying:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw933aJcK4U

His voice is auto-tuned. >_>

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

Terrible is an opinion, not a fact, opinions are subjective.

WasntAvailable

You can't have something that's objectively bad unless it's applied to technology where it will affect whether something will or wont work. Music is more free than that, someone might find it terrible, another might find it awesome. You can't tell someone something is objectivelyawful just because it sounds terrible to you.

This is someone else singing Der Holle Rache.

Terrible is an opinion, not a fact, opinions are subjective.

WasntAvailable

[QUOTE="wildjango64"]

[QUOTE="Lilyanne46"]

Finally, someone who notices besides me. Here's a prime example of how auto-tune is annoying:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw933aJcK4U

His voice is auto-tuned. >_>

Lilyanne46

Love the song, but auto-tune in it is too much...

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"] I'm pretty sure that Florence Foster Jenkins was an objectively bad singer.PannicAtack

You can't have something that's objectively bad unless it's applied to technology where it will affect whether something will or wont work. Music is more free than that, someone might find it terrible, another might find it awesome. You can't tell someone something is objectivelyawful just because it sounds terrible to you.

This is someone else singing Der Holle Rache.

No matter how bad that may sound to me or you someone will still find it appealing. You could have a song consist of farts and somepeople would stilllove it (And frankly it's an awesome concept.). Objective requires something to be a fact. You can't justify that the music is bad through objective evidence because there is none. Unless there is a universally awful song that no one likes music can notbe objectively bad, and evenif that were the casebad taste still dosn't exsist because no one likes it. Diffrent sounds appeal to diffrent people, that's all it is.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

You can't have something that's objectively bad unless it's applied to technology where it will affect whether something will or wont work. Music is more free than that, someone might find it terrible, another might find it awesome. You can't tell someone something is objectivelyawful just because it sounds terrible to you.

WasntAvailable

This is someone else singing Der Holle Rache.

No matter how bad that may sound to me or you someone will still find it appealing. You could have a song consist of farts and somepeople would stilllove it (And frankly it's an awesome concept.). Objective requires something to be a fact. You can't justify that the music is bad through objective evidence because there is none. Unless there is a universally awful song that no one likes music can notbe objectively bad, and evenif that were the casebad taste still dosn't exsist because no one likes it. Diffrent sounds appeal to diffrent people, that's all it is.

[QUOTE="homegirl2180"][QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

Yes it does. Can you use objective evidence to determine the quality of music? And no, simply stating someone has no talent is not objective in the slightest. It's still all opinionated.

WasntAvailable

Innovation, structure, profundity of lyrics, all subjective. Technical skill wont make a song better on it's own unless it's written into the song, and even that wont make it good. What your describing is your own subjective opinion on what you think makes good music, not what everyone thinks.

No matter how bad that may sound to me or you someone will still find it appealing...Unless there is a universally awful song that no one likes music can not be objectively badWasntAvailable

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

Terrible is an opinion, not a fact, opinions are subjective.

Hewkii

Let's see so:

Subjective = Subjective

Therefore Subjective = Objective.

What?

Let's see so:

Subjective = Subjective

Therefore Subjective = Objective.

What?

WasntAvailable

You can't have "bad tastes". If you like Miley or Jonas or Nickelback etc. you don't have bad taste you just like different stuff

I personally hate metal but does that give me bad taste, no it's just my opinion.Anyone who thinks you have bad taste for liking/disliking something is an idiot

counterpoint.Hewkii

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]This is Florence Foster Jenkins singing Der Holle Rache.

This is someone else singing Der Holle Rache.

PannicAtack

No matter how bad that may sound to me or you someone will still find it appealing. You could have a song consist of farts and somepeople would stilllove it (And frankly it's an awesome concept.). Objective requires something to be a fact. You can't justify that the music is bad through objective evidence because there is none. Unless there is a universally awful song that no one likes music can notbe objectively bad, and evenif that were the casebad taste still dosn't exsist because no one likes it. Diffrent sounds appeal to diffrent people, that's all it is.

Someone must like it, otherwise it wouldn't exsist.

Someone must like it, otherwise it wouldn't exsist.

WasntAvailable

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

No matter how bad that may sound to me or you someone will still find it appealing. You could have a song consist of farts and somepeople would stilllove it (And frankly it's an awesome concept.). Objective requires something to be a fact. You can't justify that the music is bad through objective evidence because there is none. Unless there is a universally awful song that no one likes music can notbe objectively bad, and evenif that were the casebad taste still dosn't exsist because no one likes it. Diffrent sounds appeal to diffrent people, that's all it is.

WasntAvailable

Someone must like it, otherwise it wouldn't exsist.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

[QUOTE="homegirl2180"] Innovation. Technical skill. Structure. Profundity of lyrics. These good music make. Does Miley Cyrus really bear the innovation of the Beatles? Or can she claim a lyrical mastery akin to Bob Dylan? No, she can't. There's nothing special about her music, in any way, and therefore it is, at best, mediocre.homegirl2180

Innovation, structure, profundity of lyrics, all subjective. Technical skill wont make a song better on it's own unless it's written into the song, and even that wont make it good. What your describing is your own subjective opinion on what you think makes good music, not what everyone thinks.

Innovation in music is highly subjective. People can claim it's innovative if they want. To some people that will be the sound they are looking for, and if it wern't they would listen to other music. It's a subjective concept called taste.

Whether you find something profound or not is also subjective. It's also something that can largely ignored seeing as music is music, not a book. If I wanted to read something profound I would read 1984. Music is for listening, lyrics are secondary.

Thirdly, I never said such a thing, ever. We are talking about music here, not novels, though not everyone thinks 1984 is universally good either, so what's your point? That's also subjective.

What you are saying is that people shouldn't have diffrent tastes because you think that particular taste is bad, which is something that is very wrong.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"] If anyone likes FFJ, it's purely ironic, I assure you.PannicAtack

Someone must like it, otherwise it wouldn't exsist.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"] If anyone likes FFJ, it's purely ironic, I assure you.PannicAtack

Someone must like it, otherwise it wouldn't exsist.

Then it's ironic, and people like it. Even if someone did like it for being ironic you could not objectively say that that person has a bad taste in music. Even at that, people may still like that if it alligns with their taste. That's just very rare, but there's no way of proving that listening to anything else will change their mind. It's still just diffrent sounds appealing to diffrent people for diffrent reasons.

What you are saying is that people shouldn't have different tastes because you think that particular taste is bad, which is something that is very wrong.

WasntAvailable

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

What you are saying is that people shouldn't have different tastes because you think that particular taste is bad, which is something that is very wrong.

Hewkii

Irrelevant. The colour of the sky does not relate to music past some inspiration. We know objectively, as a fact, that the sky is blue. What you are suggesting is that if people like music you do not then they must havedamaged hearing because your taste in music is objectively correct. Music is not an absolute thing, we do not say that doing one particular thing is good while doing another is bad. When talking about the sky we are certain of what it is and what it does. Music is not objective. Never has never will be.

We know objectively, as a fact, that the sky is blue.

WasntAvailable

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

We know objectively, as a fact, that the sky is blue.

Hewkii

Dosn't make a diffrence. If that were the case then the sky is subjective. I'm pretty sure there is some scientific evidence that tells us what the sky is and how it is seen from theaverage persons eye though. If another person saw it as red then I suppose he's not wrong, seeing as from his eyes the sky is red.

The sky is not music though.

Doesn't make a difference. If that were the case then the sky is subjective. I'm pretty sure there is some scientific evidence that tells us what the sky is and how it is seen from the average persons eye though.

WasntAvailable

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]

We know objectively, as a fact, that the sky is blue.

Hewkii

Actually, all we know is that the light from the sun is diffracted through the atmosphere changing its wavelength and frequency, which makes photoreceptors in our eyes reacting to the various types of photons hitting them. Which then tells us that the sky is blue. carrot-cake