Favourite Band

[EffigyForgotten]

Let me get this straight:

You are upset that people prejudge you, and that generally, you aren't immediately accepted or understood.

Please tell me you see a problem with the piece I just quoted, Effigy.



I appreciate the heavy side of music, but only when the music is actually good. I don't care if something is metal or not; I just care that it is good.

Most "metal" sucks, and it is the worst sounding live music there is.

What I mean is that there is NO reason for them to judge me for something i'm not. I don't have anything that indicates me being emo other than having long hair when I know hundreds of people with long hair that think metal is satans music. The people that actually do wear makeup and pierce everything they can should just stop because really they always say they hate themselves and want to kill their self. I mean seriously why not just do it instead of making people like me look bad?

 

[Postulate]

Now now let's not advocate people killing themselves. Why not just hang out with the emo kids instead? They're always a barrel of laughs, plus they have great orgies or so I hear...just don't be surprised if the genders get crossed somewhere in there, but hey we all have to deal with it at some point

 

[Marwen]

What the hell is screamo?

EDIT: Nevermind.

 

[Kenneth R.]

It's not so hard - genres have empirical properties you can talk about. Metal tends to have a lot of guitar harmonies, power chords, and double bass drumming. Is that not a fact?

That depends on if you're listening to Kiss or Blut Aus Nord. Still waiting on stuff that can be quantifiable for a specific genre AND used to effectively and authoritatively compare with another genre.

It's easier and probably less hassle to just agree that no genre can be proven superior and just listen to what you like.

 

[Postulate]

That depends on if you're listening to Kiss or Blut Aus Nord. Still waiting on stuff that can be quantifiable for a specific genre AND used to effectively and authoritatively compare with another genre.

It's easier and probably less hassle to just agree that no genre can be proven superior and just listen to what you like.

How does it make sense to say that bands within a genre are comparable, but not bands between genres? Are genres magic barriers that criticism becomes invalid between? Why would that be?

For example, I could say that metal is a worse forum for improvisation, because it does not handle chord and rhythm changes as smoothly as jazz does. How is that not a valid criticism?

I could also say that metal is hostile to the introduction of new timbres since the sound of the electric rhythm guitar is overbearing and doesn't allow space for lots of interesting acoustic instruments and all but the loudest and least subtle percussion tends to be drowned out. Genres with a cleaner use of the electric guitar, like neo-prog and jazz fusion, do not have this problem.

See? Comparison between genres.

 

[Marwen]

You don't need a computer algorithm to prove that one genre is artistically better than another, just a decent taste and knowledge of music.

Oh and the only one you need to do any "proving" to is yourself. So yeah, genre appreciation is subjective, but that doesn't make all genres necessarily equal in artistic value, of course not. But I'll say it again, there is good music and bad music (and everything in between), not good genres and bad genres. It's just that some genres (due to their inherent characteristics as described by Postulate, as well as those of the people/scene generally involved etc) tend to have more crap than others. And that is not just some subjective opinion.

Having said that I'm against (seriously) mocking people based on what they listen to and stuff like that. It's immature.

 

[Kenneth R.]

How does it make sense to say that bands within a genre are comparable, but not bands between genres? Are genres magic barriers that criticism becomes invalid between? Why would that be?

For example, I could say that metal is a worse forum for improvisation, because it does not handle chord and rhythm changes as smoothly as jazz does. How is that not a valid criticism?

I could also say that metal is hostile to the introduction of new timbres since the sound of the electric rhythm guitar is overbearing and doesn't allow space for lots of interesting acoustic instruments and all but the loudest and least subtle percussion tends to be drowned out. Genres with a cleaner use of the electric guitar, like neo-prog and jazz fusion, do not have this problem.

See? Comparison between genres.

Nice. But no, you can't say stuff like that. Ephel Duath is pretty much chaotic improvisation. Metal isn't necessarily hostile to new timbres given the prominence of folk metal, oriental metal, and other sub-genres in which ethnic acoustic instruments are featured. You calling it a "problem" is itself an error. Also, I didn't say bands between genres are incomparable. I said genres are not empirically comparable. Criticism is entirely possible, but it is all subjective. Like, that's just your opinion, man.

You don't need a computer algorithm to prove that one genre is artistically better than another, just a decent taste and knowledge of music.

Oh and the only one you need to do any "proving" to is yourself. So yeah, genre appreciation is subjective, but that doesn't make all genres necessarily equal in artistic value, of course not. But I'll say it again, there is good music and bad music (and everything in between), not good genres and bad genres. It's just that some genres (due to their inherent characteristics as described by Postulate, as well as those of the people/scene generally involved etc) tend to have more crap than others. And that is not just some subjective opinion.

Having said that I'm against (seriously) mocking people based on what they listen to and stuff like that. It's immature.

Yeah, you're kinda just saying what I'm saying. It's all subjective. I think some genres are more interesting than others. I can't scientifically prove that to you though. It's not possible because deciding on the criteria (which I've still yet to see a significant list) is itself a subjective endeavor - what is "better" differs from me to you.

 

[EyeballKid]

Person A likes salad and hates pizza.
Person B hates salad and likes pizza.

Thus, salad and pizza are awesome.
Thus, salad and pizza suck.

 

[Kenneth R.]

Yep

 

[Marwen]

Person A likes salad and hates pizza.
Person B hates salad and likes pizza.

Thus, person A is an idiot.

Fixed.

 

[Postulate]

Person A likes salad and hates pizza.
Person B hates salad and likes pizza.

Thus, salad and pizza are awesome.
Thus, salad and pizza suck.

So, because people disagree, there is no capacity for argument?

Weak.

 

[donKyle]

I've been getting a kick out of this. I can't take it seriously.

 

[Wander]

I've been getting a kick out of this. I can't take it seriously.

Yeah.

 

[Postulate]

I've been getting a kick out of this. I can't take it seriously.

Well, this is "like, just my opinion," and therefore apparently worthless, but I think it's sad that this hand-waving notion of subjectivism makes what we are most passionate about least worthy of serious discussion.

 

[Wander]

Well, this is "like, just my opinion," and therefore apparently worthless

Yeah.

 

[Kenneth R.]

I've been getting a kick out of this. I can't take it seriously.

I'm sthuper serial guys.

 

[Postulate]

I'm sthuper serial guys.

Must you be so disappointing, Kenneth?

 

[Kenneth R.]

He's right, you know. There's no way to objectively discuss this topic. We might as well start a 100 page thread about which religion is better.

 

[Wander]

He's right, you know. There's no way to objectively discuss this topic. We might as well start a 100 page thread about which religion is better.

I vote for all religions sucking ass.

 

[EyeballKid]

So, because people disagree, there is no capacity for argument?

Weak.

There's plenty of capacity for it. You can do it all you like. But I sincerely doubt that anyone on the internet will ever concede their point simply because someone else, a faceless, nameless person with no proven knowledge or experience over a certain point, a point which has no true or agreeable conclusion, disagrees with them. Thus, in my opinion, such arguments are pointless.

Likewise, we can probably present valid arguments on the validity of arguing for at least 20 pages.

I vote for all religions sucking ass.

I vote for all religions totally rocking!

We should turn these arguments into polls that don't allow forum replies. Whichever opinion receives more votes will be considered fact, until such time as another poll is created that contradicts the findings of the first poll.