Can every musical form potentially achieve perfection? - Music

Skinny

birdman_handrub.gif

Spyglass wrote:

After reading the first sentence I realize that this time I'm guilty of a misinterpretation. I figured you were talking about cheap radio pop music when you said "aimless" and "just to exist."

Here's my take: Aimless music in the experimental vein achieves a goal of freedom of expression, experimrntation, etc. IMO, music made just to be can only fail if it doesn't exist. This may or may not ve experimental, but TMR proves that freedom can be perfected with boldness. Experimental music and left-field music personify freedom, and I wish more people could enjoy it. I'd kill to live in an area with a station that plays this kind of music.

So can perfection be achieved through pure, almost subconscious experimentation whose only goal is freedom of expression? What would perfection look or sound like in said case, where there is no template to actually be perfected?

Also, when you say a song is "perfect", do you mean that you think that it can't possibly be improved upon in any way, in terms of composition and performance and production (and potentially lyrics), or do you just mean that you think it's really, really good?
_________________
2021 in full effect. Come drop me some recs. Y'all know what I like.

Spyglass

Resident Metalhead

Gender: Male

Location: The red dot on the map

Skinny wrote:

Spyglass wrote:

After reading the first sentence I realize that this time I'm guilty of a misinterpretation. I figured you were talking about cheap radio pop music when you said "aimless" and "just to exist."

Here's my take: Aimless music in the experimental vein achieves a goal of freedom of expression, experimrntation, etc. IMO, music made just to be can only fail if it doesn't exist. This may or may not ve experimental, but TMR proves that freedom can be perfected with boldness. Experimental music and left-field music personify freedom, and I wish more people could enjoy it. I'd kill to live in an area with a station that plays this kind of music.

So can perfection be achieved through pure, almost subconscious experimentation whose only goal is freedom of expression? What would perfection look or sound like in said case, where there is no template to actually be perfected?

Also, when you say a song is "perfect", do you mean that you think that it can't possibly be improved upon in any way, in terms of composition and performance and production (and potentially lyrics), or do you just mean that you think it's really, really good?

Think of it as "abstract art." I personallu think much of it is crap but you'll find something you really like if you look deeply enough. Almost every broad form of music has had at least one perfect piece of music that I've heard. Free Jazz is incredibly aimless and I personally choose Coltrane's Sun Ship over A Love Supreme. The former is in my top 100.

As for your second question: The former. A lot of songs are really really good, like several Doolittle songs. But there is room for improvement on many of these songs. "Debaser" needs lyrical improvement IMO, and its unconventional lyrical content concerning a 20's experimental film is a very interesting topic that could be further explored. The beat and composition is IMO perfect. In opposition (no pun intended), "Dead" perfectly expresses the chaotic feelings of sexual tension and the act of killing for it. The beat is hypnotic but chaotic in a noisy and repetitive format. I also share post-hardcore love with that song.

I firmly believe perfection can be achieved because millions upon millions of pieces have been produced. At an extreme minimum, one of them has to be perfect by now.

Now let's talk about your idea of perfection, if you have one. I'll bet your take is pretty interesting.
_________________
Do it yourself and let me play my music: https://www.besteveralbums.com/thechart.php?c=61802

craola

crayon master

Location: pdx

i think that music, like any artform, is sort of how its framed. think marcel duchamp's fountain. hitting a rock with a stick certainly has a musical quality to it, but until it's framed as such, it's just a stick hitting a rock. however aimless, experimental, or wandering a piece of music is - if it's being performed in front of an audience, if it's being recorded, if it's simply existing in the basement the musician's mother has surrendered to him - if there is any musical intent behind it, then there is a goal of some sort, however flimsy or unassuming that is. i've had times that i've locked myself in a closet and played two chords ad nauseam for longer than i'd care to admit for the simple joy of it or to blow off steam or whatever. goals achieved. i doubt any of my roommates would've called those obnoxious moments "perfection".

on the other hand, if the listener and not the performer is the one framing it as art or music or what have you, perhaps there is no intent, at least not as far as music is concerned. like if my dog wags her tail against the door rhythmically, but i am enamored by the tone, timbre, rhythm of it.... that is music, no? and i can't imagine there are any "goals" being achieved, at least not so far as the music is concerned. she's just letting out her excitement or whatever, oblivious to the incredible beats she's laying down. i realize that few would ever really call that music, but if i sampled that tail wag and threw a couple hi hats on it, you'd get your groove on.

the question then is, "who decides what's music? the performer or the observer?"

perfection in any artistic medium is a strange concept, really, being subjective in its successes and failures, and as someone else said, it's ultimately in the eye of the beholder. we've all got different standards. mine must be pretty low because i've heard many compositions, albums, songs, moments, etc. that i thought were perfect.