Dude... you miss the point. I'm not saying you can't like something more than classical but to say that it is of better QUALITY is absurd.
I mean let's put this in metal terms. Saying that Rilo Kiley is better than Beethoven is like saying that Mortician is better than Black Sabbath. It's ridiculous.
so whats the objective measure of 'quality'?
art is a communicative medium, how the fuck do you evaluate it without taking into account the attitudes of the observer towards it? how the fuck is the subjective experience of art separable from its objective essence?
oh that's right IT ISNT you fucking dumbfuck
edit: even if you feel that art can possess a goal not necessarily synergistic with its role as communicator with individuals, you'd have a hard time demonstrating that this is objective fact and not your own prescribed reasoning.
i don't get you people. is it really so hard to deal with the fact that your taste in music isn't objectively fucking superior to anyone else's? it's pretty easy to deal with, just take my approach. while i can't objectively demonstrate that my taste in music is superior, given the appreciation of art depends on how the subjective observer relates to the work, drawing on their own past experience & general nature, i can safely conclude that certain types of people are inclined to like certain types of music, and therefore that a person's taste in music is, to some degree, a reflection of their personality. as most classical music is, to me, boring and irrelevant, i can therefore conclude that anyone who thinks classical music is the best music is, to me, an escapist dullard.
seriously this desire to believe that your own preferences are supported by INCONTROVERTIBLE OBJECTIVE
FACT just reeks of insecurity and a childish philosophical outlook