Is Summoning the best, still active metal band?
- Thread starter Sadguru
- Start date
Alcapoth
S t a r E
I recently checked out Summoning myself, and must say they are INDEED a terrific band. But far from the best. There's too much out there. I have a strange feeling I should check out more from them...
I only heard stuff from their myspace.
I only heard stuff from their myspace.I'm really surprised they have internet access in publicly funded group homes. You're wasting taxpayer money.
best active metal bands: Katatonia, Opeth, Nevermore, Enslaved, Shining, Meshuggah, Akercocke, Madder Mortem, Esoteric(?), Keep of Kalessin and Blut Aus Nord.
What do you mean "out there"?I recently checked out Summoning myself, and must say they are INDEED a terrific band. But far from the best. There's too much out there. I have a strange feeling I should check out more from them...
S<issors
wins.
- Jan 16, 2007
- 1,809
- 2
- 36
This statement is both bizarre and incorrect... on a couple of levels, in fact.
1). You CAN prove that an object is a certain color- just requires you to examine light waves. So it's not a qualitative characteristic.
2). If it were truly qualitative, then a summer sky wouldn't actually "be" any color at all, and could very well be perceived as being a creepy yellowish green.
You're silly
all_sins_undone
New Metal Member
- Oct 5, 2005
- 4,934
- 7
- 0
lol @ trying to have a serious discussion when you don't even understand the most basic of sentences
Oh, don't worry about me. I'm doing just fine, thanks. Oh, one more comment of this kind and I'll gladly make use of that "ignore list" feature. Believe me, I have no problems dealing with criticism, as long as it's done in a constructive manner. However, almost all your posts here are about trolling and quite frankly, it's getting old...
all_sins_undone
New Metal Member
- Oct 5, 2005
- 4,934
- 7
- 0
Scourge of Malice
Member
If you ignore the fact that the last Katatonia album is absolutely amazing, okay. I could care less about the other bands you mentioned though.
all_sins_undone
New Metal Member
- Oct 5, 2005
- 4,934
- 7
- 0
Scourge of Malice
Member
I could say "lol" to that but that would be a bit redundant wouldn't it?
And you know whats funny? Being bored as I am on a thursday night, I looked through your recent posts or whatever its called, and out of 30 or so that I looked at, only ONE was a positive post. The rest is condescending "youre a faggot/ get some taste/ lol" bullshit. What is wrong with you that you feel the need to respond to every retarded post in this forum? I'd lose my fucking mind if I did that.
And you know whats funny? Being bored as I am on a thursday night, I looked through your recent posts or whatever its called, and out of 30 or so that I looked at, only ONE was a positive post. The rest is condescending "youre a faggot/ get some taste/ lol" bullshit. What is wrong with you that you feel the need to respond to every retarded post in this forum? I'd lose my fucking mind if I did that.
Kenneth R.
Cináed
Opethian666
Booze influenced
- Sep 17, 2005
- 1,105
- 0
- 36
Scourge Of God said:
Thank you for noticing the obvious. However, my point was that it is fallacious to think that you can objectively, quantitatively rate music, and thus the taste of a person concerning music, thus musical preference. For instance, you cannot state that if a random person does not like summoning, that they 'do not have good taste', just like you cannot state that if someone likes the color of a summer sky more than chartreuse, he has worse taste in colors than someone who like chartreuse more. You can say that they do not have your taste, but declaring your taste as qualitatively higher than that of someone else is fallacious, unless you attach a certain attribute that can be quantitavely measured to taste. For instance, if you define musical taste as the quantitative equivalent of the sum, over all songs a person listens to, of the multiplication of the value a person attaches to song i (from 1 to n, where n is the total amount of songs), from 0 to 1, with the average amount of notes played in song i, divided by n, you can quantitatively compare musical tastes between different persons. However, in general, taste is defined completely different, as the preference of songs, where this preference is determined by a massive amount of factors, different for each person, making it impossible to objectively compare between different persons. Therefore, stating that you think a certain band is the best active metal band in the world, and that anyone who thinks otherwise has inferior taste to yours, is complete bullshit.
S<issors
wins.
- Jan 16, 2007
- 1,809
- 2
- 36
^It's not obvious; color is not qualitative! It may hard to measure how blue something is, but you *can* prove that it is blue rather than green. Light waves...
"Color" would probably correspond more to the genre of a band (you might debate whether a band is "tr00 kvlt" black metal and talk about production values, but you can demonstrate that it is, in fact, black metal and not hip-hop by looking at vocal style, blastbeats, etc) than to how good it is, which is almost entirely personal opinion.
"Color" would probably correspond more to the genre of a band (you might debate whether a band is "tr00 kvlt" black metal and talk about production values, but you can demonstrate that it is, in fact, black metal and not hip-hop by looking at vocal style, blastbeats, etc) than to how good it is, which is almost entirely personal opinion.
JaadCe
Member
Opethian666
Booze influenced
- Sep 17, 2005
- 1,105
- 0
- 36
s<issors said:
You are mistaken in this assertion concerning the context which we were discussing. We were not discussing whether the subject (music, and then color) could be quantitatively defined (the first cannot, the second can), we were discussing whether the value of the preference of different persons concerning the subject could be quantitatively compared. The fact that you can prove that something is a certain color does not mean that the preference of colors in individuals can be quantitatively compared. The wavelengths and frequencies of the electromagnetic radiation of the light, lying in the visual spectrum, that is reflected from matter and reaches our visual receptors, can be measured and thus it can be determined what color it is to us. However, the value of the value (no, this is not a typo, it just goes to show how absurd comparing taste is) that we attach to color (or music) is not a quantitatively comparable characteristic, as our values differ because we differ, and any "rating system" constructed by any individual will be directly dependant from this individual, making it unusable for anyone but himself. From the way this analogy was used in the discussion it should have been clear that in this context, color is not a quantitative characteristic.
And that is why color, in the context of what we were discussing, is a qualitative characteristic. You can demonstrate that something has a wavelength of 530 nm, and is thus green, but you can only measure how "good" this colour is for one individual, you cannot extrapolate this measurement, and even this way of measuring, to other individuals, and thus compare whether someone's taste in color is superior or inferior to someone else's. Also, your analogy of genres with colors is fallacious. Colors can be accurately quantitatively measured (not compared concerning quality, in the sense of superior or inferior), because they are tied to a continuous spectrum of electromagnetic waves. Genres cannot, their definitions are not bound to one continuously measurable entity, and are too vaguely defined as to be considered a quantitatively definable entity.
Similar threads
