The 5 magnificent delusions regarding musical elitism

I actually feel there has been some decent discussion in this thread.

For the most part I can agree that music is purely subjective. However I think its possible to rate a composers ability objectively.

For instance lets say two composers are compared who both create objectively good music. However one of the composers continues to recycle his original ideas, and whilst the new work is good there is little experimentation with anything new. The other composer is able to reinvent a new sound every album and still maintain a similar standard of what is considered objectively "good." It would be obvious that the second composer is better.
 
I completely agree with Sadguru, like that should be a suprise. I don't agree at all that you can rate a composer's ability objectively. Fizz nullified his example with the phrase "objectively good". There is no such thing in the first place. Knowing the context of a piece of music isn't the be all and end all of analysis either, as even context is skewed and abiguously interpreted through the 'audience' or 'listener'.
 
soundave said:
As an example, Dickens's depiction of children has a lot to do with his youth. Because his father was deeply in debt, young Charlie was pulled from school and had to work in a shoe polish factory. He was devastated, and kids who are prematurely adults appear throughout his works.

Anyhoo...
This is almost bordering on off topic in my opinion but anyway. Consider also that children in the 19th century were viewed differently than children are with our 21st century frame of reference. But once again this goes back to what I was saying about the person experienceing the work contributing to the way the work is contextualised.
 
You know what is truly ridiculous? Every time anyone in this thread deludes themselves into thinking there is some artificial universal standard by which we can analyze music, the term "universality" is misused.

"most people agree that some sounds are bad~!1" doesn't translate as "some degree of universality." it translates to "consensus" by a group of people in the majority. what the fuck does that mean to someone who doesn't care for their way of looking at things?

nothing at all.
 
Well said. Don't expect to make any friends with that kind of thinking though. The correct way to analyse things around here is "U no nothing you stoopid noob ur music is ghey, fag. lmfao"
 
Sorry, I am out of touch with all the current trends in online acronyms. Let me guess the prize is that she gets to wear the pointy hat again? It was between Kenji Urban and Abercrombie and Fitch anyway.
 
Nothinggod said:
Sorry, I am out of touch with all the current trends in online acronyms. Let me guess the prize is that she gets to wear the pointy hat again? It was between Kenji Urban and Abercrombie and Fitch anyway.

WNG, YCBC W/O UAAB
 
oic.

EDIT; w8 im' try 2 save my credi-ability with u guys :(:[

You're right, localloadie! That is incredibly ironic! L.O.L.ZZZZZZ :imbecile:

oh and by the way, you want to know what's more ironic than that? you calling me an imbecile with the piss-poor grammatical/spelling/punctuation skills you and Nothinggod are bent on continuously displaying while all along doing everything you can save for double-spacing your text to appear smart when all in all you're nothing more than the hugest faggots here