Macy
Traitor (but nice pic)
Oh... my... God
That... was... just... too... heavy...
Polyeidus was right, what have I gotten myself into!?
Well, of course I am not the All Mighty God in Heaven, and what I, or any other mortal, says is just an opinion. But mankind has set standards and concluded a couple of things, like for instance: a person who tells something that is untrue is called a liar. But I'm not going to start a discussion on Sokrates here about ultimate truth. To answer your question; there are several measures according to me when judging music:
1. If it means something on an emotional level
2. If it's technically brilliant, after standards set by mortal men
3. If it's produced/arranged in a way that is considered innovative, after standards set by mortal men
Those are the mayor measures, I might have overlooked something, but this is what I judge music by and even though no one can say what's right and what's wrong on no.1, the two other's can. Let's take a simple example:
If a band plays off-beat, and another is very tight, of course you'll say the second one is better in that aspect. If the first band's technical limitations do something for you emotionally, fine, but the fact is still there: the second band is better from a technical point of view.
Therefore, there are bands with better musicians (except for Russell), better songs, better arrangements, better production, better soundquality, more innovation etc than Symphony X. Facts.
Like Geoff Tate once said about not "searching for black and white answers in a grey world".
That... was... just... too... heavy...
Polyeidus was right, what have I gotten myself into!?
Well, of course I am not the All Mighty God in Heaven, and what I, or any other mortal, says is just an opinion. But mankind has set standards and concluded a couple of things, like for instance: a person who tells something that is untrue is called a liar. But I'm not going to start a discussion on Sokrates here about ultimate truth. To answer your question; there are several measures according to me when judging music:
1. If it means something on an emotional level
2. If it's technically brilliant, after standards set by mortal men
3. If it's produced/arranged in a way that is considered innovative, after standards set by mortal men
Those are the mayor measures, I might have overlooked something, but this is what I judge music by and even though no one can say what's right and what's wrong on no.1, the two other's can. Let's take a simple example:
If a band plays off-beat, and another is very tight, of course you'll say the second one is better in that aspect. If the first band's technical limitations do something for you emotionally, fine, but the fact is still there: the second band is better from a technical point of view.
Therefore, there are bands with better musicians (except for Russell), better songs, better arrangements, better production, better soundquality, more innovation etc than Symphony X. Facts.
Like Geoff Tate once said about not "searching for black and white answers in a grey world".