Best Ever Albums

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Facetious — Sat, 2 Sep 2017 02:56:15 GMT

Author: Facetious

Posted: 09/02/2017 06:56

Skinny wrote:

Still on the same level as most - if not all - Led Zep albums. Probs.

Well, it's just as good as Presence and probably better than In Through the Out Door at least...

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Luigii — Fri, 1 Sep 2017 23:06:48 GMT

Author: Luigii

Posted: 09/02/2017 03:06

Gowi wrote:

I actually have an idea for an ADP I have been sitting on.

Cool. Can't wait to see it.

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

mickilennial — Fri, 1 Sep 2017 22:57:48 GMT

Author: mickilennial

Posted: 09/02/2017 02:57

Luigii wrote:

Yo can we do this for other acts that get hate?

I actually have an idea for an ADP I have been sitting on.

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Skinny — Fri, 1 Sep 2017 21:43:42 GMT

Author: Skinny

Posted: 09/02/2017 01:43

Still on the same level as most - if not all - Led Zep albums. Probs.

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Luigii — Fri, 1 Sep 2017 21:41:47 GMT

Author: Luigii

Posted: 09/02/2017 01:41

Yo can we do this for other acts that get hate?

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

CA Dreamin — Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:10:37 GMT

Author: CA Dreamin

Posted: 09/01/2017 18:10

Applerill wrote:

https://www.tinymixtapes.com/features/i-cant-help-feel-pain )

Insightful article, thanks for sharing.

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Applerill — Fri, 1 Sep 2017 04:58:14 GMT

Author: Applerill

Posted: 09/01/2017 08:58

Hmm, I thought about this thread again this morning as I was reading that TinyMixTapes analysis of nu metal. I'd known about all the travesties that happened at Woodstock '99 (mostly thanks to Steven Hyden's great chapter on it in his first book What Ever Happened to Alternative Nation years ago), but I often forget about Limp Bizkit's intense misogyny because I'm having so much fun :/ It does make it strange though that, just like with Brokencyde a decade later, people often would ignore these real issues of the music instead of talking about how much they hate that rap shit in their heavy metal (or with certain types, how Pro Tools and digital distortion were "ruining music"). This shows that, while there definitely was a lot of privilege and ignorance in nu metal, there was just as much of it on the outskirts, which is much of why I feel like a blanket distaste feels wrong for me. And as Tap pointed out, there was something truly futurist (a label that itself implies problematicness if you know twentieth-century history) about the scene, and in a general genre like metal loaded with white supremacists, the diversity of nu metal was surprisingly solid.

(Here's the TMT piece if you wanna read it: https://www.tinymixtapes.com/features/i-cant-help-feel-pain )

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Repo — Sun, 9 Jul 2017 08:37:07 GMT

Author: Repo

Posted: 07/09/2017 12:37

Tap wrote:

A lot of sadness went into last year's Sufjan Stevens album. And that resonated with a lot of people. But when I heard the mix of instrumentation and his vocals, the extreme preciousness of it made me laugh, and I did not take what I heard very seriously. I believe that the responses from both myself and the fans of this album to be genuine and coming from an informed place of experience, and that there were no failures on the part of the listener on either side. If the recorded music's worth was determined by how well it is conveying emotion, there would be an argument for a failure on my part to not recalibrate my taste to access the sadness contained within the record. And there would also be an argument that there is a failure on the part of others to not recalibrate their tastes to no longer fall for this sort of mawkishness. Neither of those things are true though. Both responses are the honest result of engaging with music. They are good and don't invalidate the other in any way.
.

lol. I've had BOTH the responses u mention to this album at different times.. It totally depends on my mood. Lately it's been really resonating with me. And that's true for so many albums for totally proving your point. Our role as a listener is vital. And a lot if it is out our control & just unconscious. Shaded by our past experiences in life as well as with music. Peace, brother!

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

AfterHours — Fri, 7 Jul 2017 16:13:49 GMT

Author: AfterHours

Posted: 07/07/2017 20:13

@ Apperill

Possible edit:

If what you were pointing out with Ben Ratliff is that he is an example of a serious, dedicated music listener/historian/critic who's extensively experienced Rock (not just pop) and/or Classical (and I don't know if he has nor do I have the time at the moment to check) ... Then if that's the case, and if he also considers Miley Cyrus among the great artists of either genre, then I can see how what you've said there would relate to one of the points Tap and I were arguing about.

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

AfterHours — Fri, 7 Jul 2017 14:36:13 GMT

Author: AfterHours

Posted: 07/07/2017 18:36

Applerill wrote:

Have you read Applerill's posts?

😜
Tap chats with me a lot on Discord, Afterhours, and hangs out with lots of people like SuedeSwede who I've been best friends with for years, so I think Tap knows who I am better than you do.

My comment was not meant to be taken very meaningfully or seriously. I was just referring to your one or two, maybe 3 interjecting posts along this thread, which tended towards the prankster side. Maybe I've seen you do it on other threads but I'm not sure.

Applerill wrote:

In any case, what I don't understand is how finding artistic resonance in something makes you inferior to those who automatically dismiss it. Once again, with all due respect, Afterhours, I can say with pretty strong certainty that Tap has studied experimental music more than you have, and much of that passion for the electronic side of that may have come from Limp Bizkit. Likewise, as a gender fluid person, Miley Cyrus & Her Dead Pets made me bawl my eyes out on first listen, and then come back to absorb it for dozens more.

I do have extensive experience in experimental music across the histories of Jazz, Classical and Rock music but I have no idea if Tap has more knowledge/experience in experimental music or not. Either way it was never particularly relevant to the argument and the points we were covering, though it might have been if we approached that aspect of things. Looking at Tap's chart just now, it is a fascinating chart for sure, with plenty to recommend.

Applerill wrote:

In fact, even with Miley's pop stuff, some of the smartest music critics I've ever read have praised her. Not just avowed poptimists like Ann Powers, but even Ben Ratliff in one of my favorite music books of the past few years, Every Song Ever: 20 Ways to Listen in an Age of Plenty. In his chapter on Audio Space, he writes:

Applerill wrote:

I am listening to “Party in the U.S.A.,” by Miley Cyrus, produced by Dr. Luke. It’s a song about being young and naïve and deposited into a place with a presumed higher level of sophistication about culture, particularly musical culture: the narrator is a Nashville girl being taken to a party in Los Angeles. The party is above her level. She’s closed up with fear; she lacks cultural self-confidence. And then, hearing what she likes, acknowledging it through repetition— not twice but, crucially, three times (“ when the DJ dropped my favorite tune / and the Britney song was on / and the Britney song was on / and the Britney song was on…”), she finds a tunnel in the music. (“ Nodding my head like yeah / Moving my hips like yeah.”) It’s a song about biding time with low expectations— apprehension, doubt, second-guessing— before entering a physical space of great possibility, and then, once inside the physical space, gaining psychological entry to the music that thrills you. Finally, it is a song about listening: one of the greatest ever made.

It begins with chunked rhythm guitar and moves along with medium-tempo funk drums, tambourine, and the most amazing synthetic swell in the chorus— distended, overmodulated, bass-thickened bloop glissandi that seem to bulge out of the wall, preceded by hissing and shooshing, pushing against your ear. Dr. Luke’s signature is compression, which means a narrowing of the dynamic range of an audio signal (such that the soft sounds and the loud sounds are both loud). So rather than only flicking between soft and loud— which is what we once got with gamelan ensembles, Beethoven, and Nirvana, and what we have long accepted from composers as a useful method of playing with the listener’s emotions— the song flicks between cluttered and uncluttered, or compressed and less compressed. Its softness is fake loudness. Its loudness is only slightly less fake loudness. It all feels close to you, but when it’s really close, it’s almost disturbingly so.

Producers and mastering engineers of the pre-’ 90s mentality often warn against compression for two principal reasons: because it erases the thrill of real dynamics, which is probably the first and most crucial element that anyone notices about music of any kind; and because it leads to what is now called “fatigue,” meaning that the ear and brain can’t distinguish nuances on a record, and finally can’t accept any more information at a sustained level. But I think this ignores how the power of a song like “Party in the U.S.A.” draws on its own suggestion of audio space— fake or not, fatiguing or not. It finds new criteria for dynamics, possibly forcing you to think beyond merely loud and soft.

This is an excellent analysis, thank you. Fwiw, I actually do think Party in the USA is a decent song and by far her best (that I know of). The argument was not specifically about that song's individual merits but I appreciate you sharing...

I'm in a hurry (and tbh, don't have any interest in listening to or discussing Party in the USA right now) but...

I do agree that its cadence is rather catchy and that its among the better sound engineered pop songs of its time -- and your detailed description of that is spot on.

I don't agree that emotional expressions such as "She’s closed up with fear; she lacks cultural self-confidence" are made particularly relevant by the song because her singing is too geared towards keeping the tune in place (and not a furthering of expression or nuance that would elicit such emotions in a way that might mean something more significant). Maybe I'll say more if my interest peeks and I have more time later.

[quote="Applerill"]

Quote:

Also, not to be a jerk again Afterhours, but I've met lots of people at UIC alone who has much more musical knowledge than you do (and in case you were wondering, that "suspicious" link was a Berkley PDF of Michael Fried's famous "Art and Objecthood" essay, which I also studied at UIC and presented how the way you look at art as a universal thing hasn't been true since the sixties). Your artistic appreciation mostly copies Scaruffi and the western canon, but people like my Dean of Arts Steve Everett can cover everything from Diamonda Galas to Korean P'ansori operas to Julius Eastman to happy hardcore to Hijokaidan, and that's just in one guest lecture I attended for my History of Performance Art class. I have a trans friends whose girlfriend does dada/futurist-hours DJing at Smart Bar. I've met juke/footwork dancers who knew DJ Rashad before he died. I even met up with a female musician friend from community college a few weeks ago whose influences include everything from oknyo to hiplife to crust punk. And through all this experience I've found out that, whenever someone claims to know more about music than anyone like I used to in high school, they most likely are suffering both the Dunning and the Kruger.

Right on, I'm sure there are lots of people who have much more musical knowledge than I do! How do you think I've built my own if such people didn't exist (and the artists of course)?

Anyway, it sounds like you've experienced and associated yourself a lot of art and people who are interested in a a huge variety of art ... and I would only say: keep it up

In conclusion, I'm not sure what you're trying to say in direct relation or resolution to the argument at hand, but regardless, thank you for sharing.

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Applerill — Fri, 7 Jul 2017 09:11:53 GMT

Author: Applerill

Posted: 07/07/2017 13:11

Quote:

Have you read Applerill's posts?

😜
Tap chats with me a lot on Discord, Afterhours, and hangs out with lots of people like SuedeSwede who I've been best friends with for years, so I think Tap knows who I am better than you do.

In any case, what I don't understand is how finding artistic resonance in something makes you inferior to those who automatically dismiss it. Once again, with all due respect, Afterhours, I can say with pretty strong certainty that Tap has studied experimental music more than you have, and much of that passion for the electronic side of that may have come from Limp Bizkit. Likewise, as a gender fluid person, Miley Cyrus & Her Dead Pets made me bawl my eyes out on first listen, and then come back to absorb it for dozens more.

In fact, even with Miley's pop stuff, some of the smartest music critics I've ever read have praised her. Not just avowed poptimists like Ann Powers, but even Ben Ratliff in one of my favorite music books of the past few years, Every Song Ever: 20 Ways to Listen in an Age of Plenty. In his chapter on Audio Space, he writes:

Quote:

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

AfterHours — Fri, 7 Jul 2017 05:17:21 GMT

Author: AfterHours

Posted: 07/07/2017 09:17

Tap wrote:

Quote:

Either mount a convincing argument or shut up.

If my goal starting out was to end this conversation with you being convinced of my perspective, I never would've acknowledged you. Only an idiot plays tennis with a wall and expects to win. But I do think we were able to hit some compelling stuff for anyone reading, on both sides of the argument.

I'm not sure what else there is to gain from tossing the ball back again though. We've established that you live in a world where the vast majority of people have no idea what the fuck you are talking about w/r/t the greatest that music has to offer, since I imagine the vast majority of people have not assimilated the classical music canon of great works. A lonely dwindling club of the only people who will ever know true greatness, with progressively less and less compelling work emerging in the contemporary sphere.

I live in a world full of interesting people. You're one of them. I think you're kind of a snob, but hey, sometimes it is an essential part of having conviction. We've established this divide and filled in a lot of detail but I think we've also established that the gulf is too wide for any additional meaningful thing to make it across.

Lmao "we've established that you live in a world where a vast majority of people...". Get real you hypocrite. You'd be hard pressed to find many people who've provided more insight into their criteria and ways of thinking about art/music than I have -- and shared this liberally with countless others, including the music I know and love, exchanging recommendations, insights and so forth. Good riddance to your passive-aggressiveness, random barbs, invented arguments/insights, generalities and fake moral high road!

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Tap — Fri, 7 Jul 2017 04:54:50 GMT

Author: Tap

Posted: 07/07/2017 08:54

Quote:

Either mount a convincing argument or shut up.

If my goal starting out was to end this conversation with you being convinced of my perspective, I never would've acknowledged you. Only an idiot plays tennis with a wall and expects to win. But I do think we were able to hit some compelling stuff for anyone reading, on both sides of the argument.

I'm not sure what else there is to gain from tossing the ball back again though. We've established that you live in a world where the vast majority of people have no idea what the fuck you are talking about w/r/t the greatest that music has to offer, since I imagine the vast majority of people have not assimilated the classical music canon of great works. A lonely dwindling club of the only people who will ever know true greatness, with progressively less and less compelling work emerging in the contemporary sphere (though there's more than enough pre-existing stuff to explore so that's not an inherently bad thing).

I live in a world full of interesting people. You're one of them and I fully believe you are having an incredibly fulfilling time with music and other art and will continue to do so for a very long time. I also think you're kind of a snob, but hey, sometimes it is an essential part of having conviction. We've established this divide and filled in a lot of detail but I think we've also established that the gulf is too wide for any additional meaningful thing to make it across.

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

AfterHours — Fri, 7 Jul 2017 04:08:11 GMT

Author: AfterHours

Posted: 07/07/2017 08:08

Tap wrote:

I think begrudgingly was a completely accurate word to describe your position there. Because you said that my reasoning for explaining the existence of people having a legitimate significant experience with Limp Bizkit or Miley Cyrus was false.

Where? Re-produce the quote in the context that it was said.

Tap wrote:

But then you concede that you're sure it happens

Nice touch --> "concede". I never challenged that it didn't. You keep inventing arguments within arguments. �'�

Tap wrote:

...but there seems to be reluctance at acknowledging this or exploring the idea in any way.

For instance?

Tap wrote:

You doubt that Applerill is sincere about their appreciation for Cyrus' Dead Petz album.

Have you read Applerill's posts?

Tap wrote:

You put forth an idea of a Miley Cyrus fan as having assimilated the Classical music masters as being either non-existent or describing between 7-7,000 people on Earth. You acknowledge these possibilities at the bare minimum and still show doubt, you are begrudging on this subject.

So, among all this hilarious grandstanding moral hoopla, you now have examples of people that are very conversant with the Classical music masters and also find Miley Cyrus to be a staggering musical genius the likes of them?

Tap wrote:

I haven't assimilated the Classical music masters predating recorded music much at all. Is my perspective less valid?

Wait -- you mean someone is ceaselessly arguing with me that doesn't really know what the fuck I'm talking about? Gee whiz ... oh man, I didn't see this one coming 9 forum pages ago.

Tap wrote:

If I love a Miley Cyrus song is this done out of ignorance?

Well, do you? Do you know a single serious, dedicated music listener that has explored an extensive selection of the history of Rock (let alone Jazz or Classical) that does?

Tap wrote:

I'm not trying to get you to change any of what you've written about your criteria and how you view art as a means of expression, I'm only concerned with your attitude that no one can reasonably disagree.
The problem isn't that everyone just doesn't understand how they agree with you yet. Your insistence on this is exactly the sort of disrespect for people who disagree that I'm trying to get at.

The statements I specified as objectively true are. Deal with it or prove otherwise instead of complaining in these posts like I'm not authorized to state something conclusive or factual.

Tap wrote:

I'm not trying to restate your entire position when I bring up the way you use the idea of knowledge. Sure, you say that experience is a part of it too. I don't see why it's such a big deal that I left that out when you conflate the two anyways.

Of course they tend to go hand in hand. But one could theoretically study several books on Bach or Beethoven or whoever (knowledge) and not listen and assimilate a single one of their works (experience). That's why I stress both.

Tap wrote:

And sure yeah you say it's "largely dependent upon" these things, but this is irrelevant when you have not given any indication of what the other things are.

From the original post:

"This subjectivity, one's view of how successful a work is in this regard, is largely dependent upon one's knowledge and experience in music/art, and can change (even drastically) with an increase in said knowledge/experience.

( For more on this, see my criteria for art page, here: https://www.besteveralbums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15503 )"

Tap wrote:

My problem remains. You describe these artworks as containers where the artist has poured the work into it, dependent on their skill. And then the listener consumes this, and their understanding of what they have consumed is dependent on their skill, experience, preferences, who knows how many factors. You allow for subjective disagreements, but you seem to suggest that there is something close to absolute about the depth of the poured material. At least that's how I take you saying ""Objectively" (or, if not completely, very close to it) I might claim something like "Miley Cyrus' music is less creative, less personal and less emotionally/conceptually expressive than Mahler's/Wagner's (or insert Classical master)". So even if it's only very close to objective, there may be some variation of depth perception, but there still is something close to absolute about the depth. So if someone said that Wagner is boring and they find more depth in Party In The USA (a Miley Cyrus song), I don't have the impression that you would consider that perspective to be valid. I believe you would consider this opinion to be a result of ignorance on the part of the listener. But I think that is just as valid as any claim that you or I could make. Because I believe that a piece of music, even if somehow it actually was fully objectively lacking in creativity, personality, or inherent emotional expression, a listener is still able to pour something of their own into the container and create depth based on what is there, with the only limit being on what the listener is willing to put into it.

Some of your interpretations in the upper half of this paragraph are incomplete examples of what I've said, but I've lost most of my interest in trying to work this stuff out with you...

Re: Miley Cyrus/Wagner. Yes, pretty much. If someone said they love Party in the USA and didn't like, say Tristan & Isolde, then whatever.... lots of people love Party in the USA and lots of people can't stand Tristan & Isolde, so who cares? But if someone said that Miley Cyrus' Party in the USA had more emotional expression, conceptual significance, depth, musical creativity than, say, Wagner's Tristan & Isolde (providing they'd listened to them both in full), I would definitely consider that Tristan had gone over their head and that it is likely that they didn't have enough knowledge/experience in music/art to assimilate what they were hearing. And you know what? This is real life! So I would be right! I guarantee you 100/100 times I would be correct! Oh no! The horror! And even worse!??!? I might even know how to assist such a person to improve that knowledge/experience if they wanted to. What!? No!!! 😲 Don't do it!!!!!!! 🫵

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Tap — Fri, 7 Jul 2017 02:01:05 GMT

Author: Tap

Posted: 07/07/2017 06:01

AH, I think begrudgingly was a completely accurate word to describe your position there. Because you said that my reasoning for explaining the existence of people having a legitimate significant experience with Limp Bizkit or Miley Cyrus was false. But then you concede that you're sure it happens, but there seems to be reluctance at acknowledging this or exploring the idea in any way. You doubt that Applerill is sincere about their appreciation for Cyrus' Dead Petz album. You put forth an idea of a Miley Cyrus fan as having assimilated the Classical music masters as being either non-existent or describing between 7-7,000 people on Earth. You acknowledge these possibilities at the bare minimum and still show doubt, you are begrudging on this subject.

I haven't assimilated the Classical music masters predating recorded music much at all. Is my perspective less valid for that? If it's less relevant to your perspective that's fair enough, but I think it's on the same level of merit as yours or anyone else's. If I love a Miley Cyrus song is this done out of ignorance? What about when I love a field recording album? Or Xenakis' La Legende D'Eer? I got where I am in part from loving Limp Bizkit. And I have just as much authority to say that Xenakis' La Legende D'Eer is a recording of great historical significance as you would. if you would, that is. it's kind of a difficult listen, you might not like it.

I'm not trying to get you to change any of what you've written about your criteria and how you view art as a means of expression, I'm only concerned with your attitude that no one can reasonably disagree. The problem isn't that everyone just doesn't understand how they agree with you yet. Your insistence on this is exactly the sort of disrespect for people who disagree that I'm trying to get at.

I'm not trying to restate your entire position when I bring up the way you use the idea of knowledge. Sure, you say that experience is a part of it too. I don't see why it's such a big deal that I left that out when you conflate the two anyways. And sure yeah you say it's "largely dependent upon" these things, but this is irrelevant when you have not given any indication of what the other things are. My problem remains. You describe these artworks as containers where the artist has poured the work into it, dependent on their skill. And then the listener consumes this, and their understanding of what they have consumed is dependent on their skill, experience, preferences, who knows how many factors. You allow for subjective disagreements, but you seem to suggest that there is something close to absolute about the depth of the poured material. At least that's how I take you saying ""Objectively" (or, if not completely, very close to it) I might claim something like "Miley Cyrus' music is less creative, less personal and less emotionally/conceptually expressive than Mahler's/Wagner's (or insert Classical master)". So even if it's only very close to objective, there may be some variation of depth perception, but there still is something close to absolute about the depth. So if someone said that Wagner is boring and they find more depth in Party In The USA (a Miley Cyrus song), I don't have the impression that you would consider that perspective to be valid. I believe you would consider this opinion to be a result of ignorance on the part of the listener. But I think that is just as valid as any claim that you or I could make. Because I believe that a piece of music, even if somehow it actually was fully objectively lacking in creativity, personality, or inherent emotional expression, a listener is still able to pour something of their own into the container and create depth based on what is there, with the only limit being on what the listener is willing to put into it.

Are you still unsure about whether I disagree with you?

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

Tha1ChiefRocka — Thu, 6 Jul 2017 22:33:42 GMT

Author: Tha1ChiefRocka

Posted: 07/07/2017 02:33

AfterHours wrote:

Applerill wrote:

http://atc.berkeley.edu/201/readings/FriedObjcthd.pdf

(Also, just so you know, if the art/entertainment divide really existed, then Miley Cyrus & Her Dead Petz might be the closest pop star release to the "art" category of the past few years. It's definitely more challenging than most of Pink Floyd's discography.

If you're truly serious, you've actually got me curious enough that I might even click on that link :lol:

I wouldn't click on that if I were you.

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

AfterHours — Thu, 6 Jul 2017 22:29:04 GMT

Author: AfterHours

Posted: 07/07/2017 02:29

Applerill wrote:

If you're truly serious, you've actually got me curious enough that I might even click on that link 🤣

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

AfterHours — Thu, 6 Jul 2017 22:27:17 GMT

Author: AfterHours

Posted: 07/07/2017 02:27

[quote="Temporary33"]

AfterHours wrote:

It is very useful in the original context (as regards my criteria, which in turn strongly takes into account the fundamental purpose of art). For anyone, no matter their agreement (or not) with each and every detail of my criteria, it can be very useful in determining why one favors one work of art over another, and thus determining his/her own criteria and his/her own ratings and rankings (which is a common confusion for many). What one favors is always because it has a greater degree of emotional and/or conceptual impact for the person. Note that I did not say "what one always considers 'objectively' the best" (which is folly anyway imo). But what one actually favors on a personal level, his/her actual criteria (stated or not), always falls under the perceived success of the emotional/conceptual impact upon one. Which qualities cause an emotional/conceptual impact for one might be very different for someone than it is for me, for instance, but knowing these fundamentals gives one a basic method in which to begin such an organization of rankings/ratings and criteria (which, again, may or may not be a confusing area for anyone on this forum, but I've found is useful for many).

Temporary33 wrote:

One thing before I continue is that I personally make no distinction between what I consider objectively good and what I personally prefer; they are essentially the same thing and I believe that's true for almost everyone even if they state otherwise.

Right on, me too.

Temporary33 wrote:

Well, I will say if that's how you want your criteria to be, then that's fine. I don't necessarily believe that everyone judges art in the same manner, but it seems like a "reliable" way of judging a person's enjoyment of art. I don't necessarily think it's a reliable manner of judging preference though. I may enjoy something less than something else, but still prefer it. I think give up is a more enjoyable album than Fuente Y Caudal, but prefer the latter.

Whether I personally prefer music is based upon how genuine what is being expressed is.

This was part of my quote too, which it seems like you missed/forgot when replying: "Which qualities cause an emotional/conceptual impact for one might be very different for someone than it is for me"

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

AfterHours — Thu, 6 Jul 2017 22:23:20 GMT

Author: AfterHours

Posted: 07/07/2017 02:23

Temporary33 wrote:

I'll be responding to your statements soon enough, but I'll respond to this one right now because it's probably the one that requires the least amount of words.

Solely because there are no examples of art being created without the creator of it not intent of said piece of art having a purpose, does not necessarily mean that every piece of art has to be created with the intent of having a purpose. That tends to be the case, but the art in question shouldn't dictate the artist's intent. That's up to the artist to decide.

Secondly, it's irrelevant whether or not something has a purpose, it's the intent of the creator that's up to question. The distinction between intent and purpose is not huge, but I do make the distinction that intent is more tuned towards the individual and purpose is more objective. So, you can have the intent of creating something that does nothing at all or has no reason to exist, but that doesn't necessarily mean that'll occur. I happen to think that anything that is made will have a purpose, even if it takes forever to come about, but that's irrelevant to the statement at hand.

I can't tell anymore if you're arguing with what I said or just finding a more elaborate way to agree with me in a way that appears like you haven't agreed with me. 🤣

The statement is simply:

The purpose of all art is to produce an emotional and/or conceptual impact (to greater or lesser degree).

(NOTE: By "emotional", I simply mean a conveyance of emotion, any emotion, whether happy or depressed or any other. By "conceptual", I simply mean an expression of concept, any concept conveyed in the work, whether realistic or imaginary or any other.)

In other words, regardless of the artists' exact detailed intentions for the work it always falls under that fundamental umbrella.

Re: ADP #12: Significant Other by Limp Bizkit

AfterHours — Thu, 6 Jul 2017 22:00:36 GMT

Author: AfterHours

Posted: 07/07/2017 02:00

Tap wrote:

Yes AH, I have been reading your posts in their entirety. The presence of subjectivity in the determination is still tied to knowledge.

And experience, yes. There is no question whatsoever about this. You, anyone, have been gaining it from the very first piece you heard, even if your first knowledge and experience of art was that piece, in which you were gaining it during that exposure, during the first verse, which helped you acclimate yourself to the next verse, and so on.

You also have a tendency to exaggerate and add non-existent aspects to things I say, when what I've written has been done rather carefully and meticulously as stated. For instance, you conveniently leave out the crucial word(s) "largely dependent upon" in your evaluation of whether or not you agree with my statement here. This gets annoying because you keep arguing your own modified version of what I'm actually saying, and I am put in a position to respond continuously to someone I am not even sure disagrees with me in the first place.

Tap wrote:

It's really funny to me that you continue to see this discussion revolving around an issue of my understanding, and ask which album contains the evidence to disprove you when my argument is about not viewing them as containers. Like you're reinforcing our difference by insisting that we are the same and that the issue is my knowledge has gaps that you need to fill, rather than just accepting the difference. It's fun when form echoes content.

The above is a microcosm as to why. Also, you chose to respond/challenge my statement and, maybe it's just your wording, don't seem to understand fully what you are responding to. But perhaps we are gradually resolving this.

Tap wrote:

Whether it's conveyed, or it's expressed, I do not think any approach that treats music as a straight communication dependent on the skill of expression for the musicians and the skill of reception from the listener. The listener's life of experiences both musical and non-musical will inform what they make of an album.

In direct relation to this, what I said is infact... (NOTE: Substitute "conveyance" with "expression" or alike word if it is easier)

"The fundamental common denominators to all art, music or otherwise, are that it is:

(1) A creative act (to greater or lesser degree).
(2) A conveyance of emotion(s) and/or concept(s) (to greater or lesser degree).

The purpose of all art is to produce an emotional and/or conceptual impact (to greater or lesser degree).

(NOTE: By "emotional", I simply mean a conveyance of emotion, any emotion, whether happy or depressed or any other. By "conceptual", I simply mean an expression of concept, any concept conveyed in the work, whether realistic or imaginary or any other.)"

... ... ...

"To the degree it accomplishes this, the work is successful. To the degree it does not, it isn't.

The determination of such a success is subjective.

This subjectivity, one's view of how successful a work is in this regard, is largely dependent upon one's knowledge and experience in music/art, and can change (even drastically) with an increase in said knowledge/experience."

Tap wrote:

While you acknowledge that subjectivity will inform the listener's response, your perspective still leads to claims like "A work such as the likes of a Miley Cyrus song can be engaged with and assimilated very easily and requires very little experience with art to do so. There is very little depth of expression(s) and the expression(s) contained are generally uninvolved and trivial, illuminating very little of the subject(s) they are engaging in." There is still this perspective that there are possibilities of subjectivity that are weaker than others, that the thing contained within Miley Cyrus' work is of less value than what is contained in others.

Yes that is my perspective of Miley Cyrus' music. The part above in bold (in your quote) is only true in a subjective sense, in that I am not a fan of Miley Cyrus' music and feel her music is of a much lower quality than that I favor. "Objectively" (or, if not completely, very close to it) I might claim something like "Miley Cyrus' music is less creative, less personal and less emotionally/conceptually expressive than Mahler's/Wagner's (or insert Classical master). Quality between the two is determined by the listener and his/her criteria." I might also say something like "it is highly probable that a hardcore enthusiast of Miley Cyrus has not thoroughly assimilated the Classical music masters". If you disagree, show me a case where this isn't true. It might be 1 in a million ... billion? (if it exists at all).

Tap wrote:

And while later you begrudgingly

This is another example of you inventing parts of my perspective/adding nuances to what I say. This was not begrudgingly at all. I was never arguing this to begin with.