2 Things I have noticed about the overall chart today - Music

Necharsian

Best Ever User

Gender: Male

19loveless91 wrote:

Cartoken made a good point. When an album is both critically very acclaimed + also popular with the general public, the reason a person doesn't like it is most likely that it just isn't his cup of tea, or that he searches for different things in music (eg hairymarx).

That's stupid. The reason someone doesn't like any kind of music is because of personal preferance. Don't limit it to critically acclaimed music.

What makes Is This It a better album than Bringing Down the Horse by The Wallflowers?
Answer: Nothing. Personal opinion determines everything in regards to music and what's good/bad to a specific person. NOT how many people think it's great. Influence, shminfluence. Trying to be "objective" in regards to musical "greatness" is just plain dumb.

Why are people so scared to admit something that they don't like is bad? Rather than saying "hmm.. it's just not my cup of tea." God. Grow some balls.
I think Is This It is bad. If you disagree, than that's fine. You can have opinions too. Just stop trying to validate it's greatness by saying "but... but... other people like it, so you must wrong!"

Yourselfisntsteam

19loveless91 wrote:

Yourselfisntsteam wrote:

mooseboy101 wrote:

itsit wrote:

Is This It is a masterpiece compared to Trout Mask Replica.

I can not use this emoticon enough

Thank you. Very Happy

I ask again: what makes Is This It more important (on anything other than the level of subjective preference) than any of the other thousands (and thousands) of albums released each year (before and after) that use the same basic chords, basic guitar bass vocal arrangements, same 4/4 time verse chorus structure, same general melodic ideas (there is a reason composers started making atonal music- all seemingly possible melodies have already been written) same simple rhythms, other than the fact that it was Lucky enough to receive press and marketing hype???? Think

The fact that it was still able to stand out among the crowd. And yes, in my opinion The Strokes do stand out. I replayed this album an incredible amount of times, and I'm still not bored off it, not even in the slightest.

IMO it's harder to make an album that uses the structures and ideas that have been basically already flogged to death, and STILL have universal critical appeal + commercial success, than to do a "weird-as-fuck" album that would attract attention simply for being weird as fuck.

Hey, I like your responce Very Happy

There are albums on my list that could be argued are equally guilty of the crimes I'm accusing the strokes of, I'm just trying find find a way of logically validating my opinions.

Still: I see commercial success as meaning absolutely nothing, IMO any album is capable of achieving commercial success given the right marketing scheme: for example Faust's (and they often are weird as shit) 3rd album The Faust Tapes (a 40 minute sound collage) was so sold for the price of a single in the UK, and sure enough it sold way way better than their previous albums and was even a minor success!!
I find that any half-decent album that gets enough press or hype behind it will usually get good reviews from critics, So I don't fully trust critics.

Also check the Is This It reviews on Metacritic, Not all are completely glowing (though I think all positive) but the album was not completely "universally" acclaimed

In what way do you think Is this it stands out from the crowd?

nrs182

Age: 33

I think relevance and influence is crucial only in music history and stuff, not that much in how good an album can be. An album might be the same old thing, sace chords, same structures, same melodies, same timing, same whatever and still be awesome like Is This It.
I, personally, like it very much, is not the best one i've heard, but still is going to be in my chart, and I don't really know why, I just enjoy it a lot. And i have to give it credit because even thought it is the same old stuff with a great potential of sucking, it doesnt, it rocks. It makes the same sound different and thats something.
IMO one should choose a favorite album because the enjoyment, the connection you establish with it, the place where it takes you, and that is why it's personal opinion.
I think people haven't learned the difference between "I hate that record" and "that record sucks". For example I really hate Kid A, but i do know it doesn't sucks, it's just definetely not for me. IMO saying Is This It sucks its wrong, maybe it's not for you. It works the same the other way around with the difference between "I love that record" to "That record is the best". This doesnt means you still can have your saying and decide what sucks or what doesnt, my point is people usually dont think carefully when using these sentences.

ps. My grammar might have sucked, I'm not american, I apologize.

Yourselfisntsteam

Its not that I consciously think "oooh this album uses the same ideas structures as others therefore I'm not allowed to enjoy this", its more "oh god not a I-Iv-V progression again!!!" -insert-facepalm-here

Its like having to read the millionth book using a metaphor like "the wind was howling"
or another horror movie where you can predict exactly when the monster will jump out at you

and no I'm no expert on theory- very basic knowledge

Tv on the Radio's Return to cookie Mountain is #4 on my chart and underneath its crazy arrangements and genre juxtapositions are very basic songs, Eels electro Shock blues is very simple, but I like how it fits with the lyrics to create something powerful- So I do look over these things If an album personally appeals to me in some way.

But I do honestly have trouble enjoying an album which appears to similar in musical structure to others and doesn't have appeal in any other way

I do draw a distinction between "this album sucks" and "this album isn't my cup of tea"
If I can't justify my dislike of something I admit it (ie, I just don't get the stooges fun house)
If I feel I can to an extent try to back up my opinions with reason I do feel I can say an album is bad (or in the strokes case: average)

an argument against myself: I once read that Bach was criticized for being a musical conservative during his time

this post was supposed to be short and concise, damn.

19loveless91

mag. druž. inf

Necharsian wrote:

19loveless91 wrote:

Cartoken made a good point. When an album is both critically very acclaimed + also popular with the general public, the reason a person doesn't like it is most likely that it just isn't his cup of tea, or that he searches for different things in music (eg hairymarx).

That's stupid. The reason someone doesn't like any kind of music is because of personal preferance. Don't limit it to critically acclaimed music.

What makes Is This It a better album than Bringing Down the Horse by The Wallflowers?
Answer: Nothing. Personal opinion determines everything in regards to music and what's good/bad to a specific person. NOT how many people think it's great. Influence, shminfluence. Trying to be "objective" in regards to musical "greatness" is just plain dumb.

"Not your cup of tea" or "personal preference", isn't that the same thing? I'm not saying that you can be objective in music, but if most people "personally prefer" a certain album (as seems to be the case with Is this it) than I guess it's hard to call this kind of album bad, even if you think otherwise.

Quote:

Why are people so scared to admit something that they don't like is bad? Rather than saying "hmm.. it's just not my cup of tea." God. Grow some balls.
I think Is This It is bad. If you disagree, than that's fine. You can have opinions too. Just stop trying to validate it's greatness by saying "but... but... other people like it, so you must wrong!"

Well every album has fans and haters (and in between). I thought the point of sites like BEA or RYM was to determine (2 different ways in each site) which albums have more fans (vs haters) than others - and by that see which of the albums are "the best". I mean, yeah Is this it is a bad album for you, as I dunno, VU's White Light/White Heat is a bad album for me, but for most of the others it ain't.

19loveless91

mag. druž. inf

Yourselfisntsteam wrote:

19loveless91 wrote:

Yourselfisntsteam wrote:

mooseboy101 wrote:

itsit wrote:

Is This It is a masterpiece compared to Trout Mask Replica.

I can not use this emoticon enough

Thank you. Very Happy

I ask again: what makes Is This It more important (on anything other than the level of subjective preference) than any of the other thousands (and thousands) of albums released each year (before and after) that use the same basic chords, basic guitar bass vocal arrangements, same 4/4 time verse chorus structure, same general melodic ideas (there is a reason composers started making atonal music- all seemingly possible melodies have already been written) same simple rhythms, other than the fact that it was Lucky enough to receive press and marketing hype???? Think

The fact that it was still able to stand out among the crowd. And yes, in my opinion The Strokes do stand out. I replayed this album an incredible amount of times, and I'm still not bored off it, not even in the slightest.

IMO it's harder to make an album that uses the structures and ideas that have been basically already flogged to death, and STILL have universal critical appeal + commercial success, than to do a "weird-as-fuck" album that would attract attention simply for being weird as fuck.

Hey, I like your responce Very Happy

There are albums on my list that could be argued are equally guilty of the crimes I'm accusing the strokes of, I'm just trying find find a way of logically validating my opinions.

Still: I see commercial success as meaning absolutely nothing, IMO any album is capable of achieving commercial success given the right marketing scheme: for example Faust's (and they often are weird as shit) 3rd album The Faust Tapes (a 40 minute sound collage) was so sold for the price of a single in the UK, and sure enough it sold way way better than their previous albums and was even a minor success!!
I find that any half-decent album that gets enough press or hype behind it will usually get good reviews from critics, So I don't fully trust critics.

Also check the Is This It reviews on Metacritic, Not all are completely glowing (though I think all positive) but the album was not completely "universally" acclaimed

In what way do you think Is this it stands out from the crowd?

Not all glowing reviews, but it's still pretty much universally acclaimed, there aren't many newer (10 years and younger) albums with reviews like that. It's hard to explain why Is This It stands out for me. As I said before, despite the fact I recognize that it's derivative and not exactly original, I still manage to replay it all the time without getting bored. I mean, there is an album like Back in Black (not exactly the same genre, but close enough), which is also acclaimed all around (critics, sales, BEA too) but mostly just bores the hell out of me. I don't what the exact difference is for me, but even though both albums sound like a lot other stuff, with AC/DC this makes it boring for me, while with The Strokes this doesn't even bother me at all.

I agree that commercial success and the critics aren't to be relied upon, but it's rare that you have an acclaim of that sorts.

Facetious

Gender: Male

Age: 25

Location: Somewhere you've never been

mooseboy101 wrote:

itsit wrote:

Is This It is a masterpiece compared to Trout Mask Replica.

I can not use this emoticon enough

Thanks for posting the message that I was gonna post. (And I mean this for "mooseboy101")

Yourselfisntsteam

19loveless91 wrote:

Not all glowing reviews, but it's still pretty much universally acclaimed, there aren't many newer (10 years and younger) albums with reviews like that. It's hard to explain why Is This It stands out for me. As I said before, despite the fact I recognize that it's derivative and not exactly original, I still manage to replay it all the time without getting bored. I mean, there is an album like Back in Black (not exactly the same genre, but close enough), which is also acclaimed all around (critics, sales, BEA too) but mostly just bores the hell out of me. I don't what the exact difference is for me, but even though both albums sound like a lot other stuff, with AC/DC this makes it boring for me, while with The Strokes this doesn't even bother me at all.

I agree that commercial success and the critics aren't to be relied upon, but it's rare that you have an acclaim of that sorts.

well, then I guess thats that? I don't think much more can be said on either side of this...so I think I'll stop before we start really going in circles Cool

of course I'm no fan of Back in Black either, so I guess I'm just doomed to be a horrible snob...

I re-listened to Is This It and moved its rating up from 55 to 65, so I still think its average buts not as average as I initially thought.

Necharsian

Best Ever User

Gender: Male

19loveless91 wrote:

"Not your cup of tea" or "personal preference", isn't that the same thing? I'm not saying that you can be objective in music, but if most people "personally prefer" a certain album (as seems to be the case with Is this it) than I guess it's hard to call this kind of album bad, even if you think otherwise.

Yeah, I was referring to you saying

19loveless91 wrote:

When an album is both critically very acclaimed + also popular with the general public, the reason a person doesn't like it is most likely that it just isn't his cup of tea

rather than saying all music is that way. It doesn't matter if it's critically acclaimed or not, it's always personal preferance that determines what is good or bad to someone.

I guess I just hate when someone brings an album's critical acclaim into a debate about why an album should be considered great. I couldn't care less about what other people say about an album.