Album of the day (#393): Thriller by Michael Jackson - Music

Necharsian
Best Ever User

Gender: Male

Pfft. I couldn't care less about what other people think. Thriller is alright, but if it touch me on some deep level, why should I hold it as great? I like the Velvet Underground, but not because they did anything first. I think people should care less of what everyone else thinks, and just listen to music that you like.

Jackwc
Queen Of The Forums

Location: Aaaanywhere Sex: Incredible

^ Agreed. Greatness is a purely subjective quality. If it WASN'T, all our charts would look exactly the same.
Isn't the whole idea of greatness being subjective the whole point of this site's existence?

Pet Sounds was INCREDIBLY influential, and LOADS of people love it, but I still choose not to. I don't like it. I don't think it's that great. Is it influential? Yes. Is it popular? Yes. Did it "take the world by storm"? Yes.
Do I care? Not in the slightest. Doesn't affect my opinion of it.
_________________
A dick that's bigger than the sun.

Music sucks. Check out my favourite movies, fam:
http://letterboxd.com/jackiegigantic/

Chemical Smile

Regardless of who bought it, nearly every household seems to have this album somewhere. Not a MJ fan (too creepy), but i do like Human Nature, and Eddie's solo on 'Beat It' is badass!
_________________
"Bunch of opinionated, hipster twats!"

paladisiac
= music

Gender: Male
Location: Denver

This is the album that saved the CD, the music business and made MTV (back when they played videos). Of course, MTV also helped make Jacko, but still...

This album was EVERYWHERE back then. Even kids that were normally metalheads listened to this album. The day of a nation-wide or global "communal music experience" are long gone now thanks to the internet and splintered, segmented pop radio. There'll never be another Michael Jackson nor another "Thriller".
_________________
fav artists NOW | ALL-TIME favs | i listen 2 more music than u so u don't have 2!

cartoken
The Seer

Gender: Male
Age: 39
Location: Paris

Necharsian wrote:

Pfft. I couldn't care less about what other people think. Thriller is alright, but if it touch me on some deep level, why should I hold it as great? I like the Velvet Underground, but not because they did anything first. I think people should care less of what everyone else thinks, and just listen to music that you like.

So according to you there's no great album. Only individual people with individual tastes. Mj, beatles, the strokes, radiohead, nicklback, britney spears, justin bieber, metallica, all have exactly the same value ??? Think

WrathchildIX

Gender: Male
Age: 32
Location: Saint Petersburg

ooooh , I listened this when going to university Very Happy

Necharsian
Best Ever User

Gender: Male

cartoken wrote:

Necharsian wrote:

Pfft. I couldn't care less about what other people think. Thriller is alright, but if it touch me on some deep level, why should I hold it as great? I like the Velvet Underground, but not because they did anything first. I think people should care less of what everyone else thinks, and just listen to music that you like.

So according to you there's no great album. Only individual people with individual tastes. Mj, beatles, the strokes, radiohead, nicklback, britney spears, justin bieber, metallica, all have exactly the same value ??? Think

No, no, no. Music has no specific "value". The "value" of music would be its ability to convey some sort of effect on individual listeners. Which is why it is stupid to say that you can judge music from an objective point of view. If you don't like Sgt Peppers, why would you consider it great? That makes no sense. Musical greatness is completely subjective with regards to a particular person.

Example:
You think Is This It is great. I do not.
I think The Black Halo is great. (I'm guessing) You do not.
Just because more people in the world like Is This It, does not mean that it is objectively better. It's better for you, sure. But that does not have any effect on what I think of it. Popularity/influence/and all that irrelevant stuff should not have any effect on what you personally think of an album. The only thing anyone should be worried about is the actual sound of it, and the corresponding (emotional/psychological) impact that it has on them.

In conclusion, there are great albums, but they are different for each person. Sites like BEA just collect the albums that are considered great by a vast amount of people, and create an aggregate listing of the results. They are not set in stone as irrefutably great.

cartoken
The Seer

Gender: Male
Age: 39
Location: Paris

Necharsian wrote:

cartoken wrote:

Necharsian wrote:

Pfft. I couldn't care less about what other people think. Thriller is alright, but if it touch me on some deep level, why should I hold it as great? I like the Velvet Underground, but not because they did anything first. I think people should care less of what everyone else thinks, and just listen to music that you like.

So according to you there's no great album. Only individual people with individual tastes. Mj, beatles, the strokes, radiohead, nicklback, britney spears, justin bieber, metallica, all have exactly the same value ??? Think

No, no, no. Music has no specific "value". The "value" of music would be its ability to convey some sort of effect on individual listeners. Which is why it is stupid to say that you can judge music from an objective point of view. If you don't like Sgt Peppers, why would you consider it great? That makes no sense. Musical greatness is completely subjective with regards to a particular person.

Example:
You think Is This It is great. I do not.
I think The Black Halo is great. (I'm guessing) You do not.
Just because more people in the world like Is This It, does not mean that it is objectively better. It's better for you, sure. But that does not have any effect on what I think of it. Popularity/influence/and all that irrelevant stuff should not have any effect on what you personally think of an album. The only thing anyone should be worried about is the actual sound of it, and the corresponding (emotional/psychological) impact that it has on them.

In conclusion, there are great albums, but they are different for each person. Sites like BEA just collect the albums that are considered great by a vast amount of people, and create an aggregate listing of the results. They are not set in stone as irrefutably great.

Here's where your argument is wrong :

There's a 1 million dollars prize: i took a group of 10 people who likes music and have a minimum interest in music. and you have to pick 1 album in order to have the greatest probability that these 10 people like the album.

what are you Going to choose ? OK Computer or Justin Bieber ?

This is Objectivity !

music is suppose to be art, it means it has creativity, it carries emotions, expressions, feeling, innovation, messages, impact on peolpe, quality, recognition..etc. so when an album has all this or when it has none of this it is exactly the same ? i really don't think so !

So when an album have been appreciated and loved in all countries, by many different cultures, have been sold millions of copies had a universal acclaim by critics, and by music lovers, makes every one wanna dance and feel just happy when listening to those songs (i'm talking about Beat It or Billie Jean...etc). had a huge impact on other artists. and some people had just said how crazy people were when that album came out on this thread. radios, TV, Movies ...etc never stopped playing Thriller's songs since 1982. and YOU wanna tell me that this is like any other albums, nothing extraordinary here guys just the usual music.

BULLSHIT !

kidamnesiac

naples all you do is preach the consensus, nobody needs that. Stop posting on best album threads or stop posting the consensus and i wont ever bother you again.
_________________
"I would expect something wrong with the poll if the chart favorite was not the poll winner" - naples 12-8-11
"I was hoping he was gone for good, guess it was just too much to ask" - polythene pam 05-10-12
"Nickelback > Radiohead" - bork 05-14-12

Jackwc
Queen Of The Forums

Location: Aaaanywhere Sex: Incredible

cartoken wrote:

Necharsian wrote:

cartoken wrote:

Necharsian wrote:

Pfft. I couldn't care less about what other people think. Thriller is alright, but if it touch me on some deep level, why should I hold it as great? I like the Velvet Underground, but not because they did anything first. I think people should care less of what everyone else thinks, and just listen to music that you like.

So according to you there's no great album. Only individual people with individual tastes. Mj, beatles, the strokes, radiohead, nicklback, britney spears, justin bieber, metallica, all have exactly the same value ??? :-k

No, no, no. Music has no specific "value". The "value" of music would be its ability to convey some sort of effect on individual listeners. Which is why it is stupid to say that you can judge music from an objective point of view. If you don't like Sgt Peppers, why would you consider it great? That makes no sense. Musical greatness is completely subjective with regards to a particular person.

Example:
You think Is This It is great. I do not.
I think The Black Halo is great. (I'm guessing) You do not.
Just because more people in the world like Is This It, does not mean that it is objectively better. It's better for you, sure. But that does not have any effect on what I think of it. Popularity/influence/and all that irrelevant stuff should not have any effect on what you personally think of an album. The only thing anyone should be worried about is the actual sound of it, and the corresponding (emotional/psychological) impact that it has on them.

In conclusion, there are great albums, but they are different for each person. Sites like BEA just collect the albums that are considered great by a vast amount of people, and create an aggregate listing of the results. They are not set in stone as irrefutably great.

Here's where your argument is wrong :

There's a 1 million dollars prize: i took a group of 10 people who likes music and have a minimum interest in music. and you have to pick 1 album in order to have the greatest probability that these 10 people like the album.

what are you Going to choose ? OK Computer or Justin Bieber ?

This is Objectivity !

music is suppose to be art, it means it has creativity, it carries emotions, expressions, feeling, innovation, messages, impact on peolpe, quality, recognition..etc. so when an album has all this or when it has none of this it is exactly the same ? i really don't think so !

So when an album have been appreciated and loved in all countries, by many different cultures, have been sold millions of copies had a universal acclaim by critics, and by music lovers, makes every one wanna dance and feel just happy when listening to those songs (i'm talking about Beat It or Billie Jean...etc). had a huge impact on other artists. and some people had just said how crazy people were when that album came out on this thread. radios, TV, Movies ...etc never stopped playing Thriller's songs since 1982. and YOU wanna tell me that this is like any other albums, nothing extraordinary here guys just the usual music.

BULLSHIT !

That still doesn't merit quality. Quality is subjective.
_________________
A dick that's bigger than the sun.

Music sucks. Check out my favourite movies, fam:
http://letterboxd.com/jackiegigantic/