|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Tap
to resume download
Gender: Female
Age: 38
|
- #9501
- Posted: 07/22/2019 03:42
- Post subject:
|
| RoundTheBend wrote: | I just kinda have a beef I'd like to complain about - just ignore me.
It's a logical fallacy to say something sucks because it's been "overplayed".
How does that change the work given? It's the same damn song/work when nobody has heard it or everyone has heard it 1397534764 times.
Rate things based on their quality! While I believe in reader response theory, that doesn't mean something turns to shit just because it got played a lot. It either was good to begin with or it sucked to begin with. End of story.
But alas, music isn't logical, is it? |
Quality is something we bring into the work and put on it. No music ever actually sucks in a vacuum (what is it supposed to be sucking anyways? hint: it's not a thumb), these valuations are basically always going to be about the individuals' experience with music. And the changing context of the music can change this experience dramatically.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad
Location: Ground Control
|
- #9502
- Posted: 07/22/2019 05:32
- Post subject:
|
| Tap wrote: | | RoundTheBend wrote: | I just kinda have a beef I'd like to complain about - just ignore me.
It's a logical fallacy to say something sucks because it's been "overplayed".
How does that change the work given? It's the same damn song/work when nobody has heard it or everyone has heard it 1397534764 times.
Rate things based on their quality! While I believe in reader response theory, that doesn't mean something turns to shit just because it got played a lot. It either was good to begin with or it sucked to begin with. End of story.
But alas, music isn't logical, is it? |
Quality is something we bring into the work and put on it. No music ever actually sucks in a vacuum (what is it supposed to be sucking anyways? hint: it's not a thumb), these valuations are basically always going to be about the individuals' experience with music. And the changing context of the music can change this experience dramatically. |
Yup, hence my reader response theory statement (you basically are recapping that exact theory from a literary analysis perspective).
Music is not logical. And not objective. Unless of course if we ascertain it to be. It just bothers me for some reason that "I used to love this song and then it got over played" is something I hear over and over... and if you talk about it in the context of the work doesn't have "longevity" to it, then sure. But if even today you think the quality of the track is great, but you just can't rate it (another stupid thing to do to begin with I suppose) like it deserves because it's been overplayed.
Bad rant for sure. I want my cake and eat it too...  It's probably why children are bubble wrapped and little league has parents punching each other.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Tap
to resume download
Gender: Female
Age: 38
|
- #9503
- Posted: 07/22/2019 06:31
- Post subject:
|
|
I guess I just don't see where it's illogical. Music is a way different thing than literature, it's frequently re-experienced thru attachment to social environments and other cultural products in addition to our own deliberate repetitions. Reader response theory seems like it's saying the reader arrives at a singular meaning for the work, but in this case what I think is happening is that people arrive at multiple contradictory meanings for the work due to all of the factors outside of their control, and that all of the positions are all equally valid. So if people are going to be scoring these things it would make more sense to provide a low and a high, like a weatherman. But there seems to be plenty of logic to it. I remember thinking the Requiem For A Dream soundtrack music was really powerful in the theaters, but then it started to get used in all the movie
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
PurpleHazel
|
- #9504
- Posted: 07/22/2019 20:08
- Post subject:
|
| RoundTheBend wrote: | | It's a logical fallacy to say something sucks because it's been "overplayed". |
Agreed. It's a fallacy to state that how much music is played is the reason something is good or bad.
| Quote: | | It either was good to begin with or it sucked to begin with. |
I think this is a little different. Someone can change their mind about how much they like music based on repeated listening (obviously you know this, so maybe I'm misunderstanding you).
| Tap wrote: | | And the changing context of the music can change this experience dramatically. |
Think this is a little different too. One can change one's opinion about music according to how many times they've heard it because they're responding to it differently. But the act of a radio station and/or other sources of playing something repeatedly isn't what makes it worse, it's how the person responds to that repetition.
| Quote: | | what I think is happening is that people arrive at multiple contradictory meanings for the work due to all of the factors outside of their control, and that all of the positions are all equally valid. |
The position of claiming that music is objectively less good solely based on the number of times it's played is less valid than lowering your opinion of music because you've heard it a certain number of times IMHO.
If I misunderstood what anyone meant, apologies in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
revolver94
professional dilettante
Gender: Male
Age: 29
Location: DC suburb
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
Hayden
Location: CDMX
|
- #9506
- Posted: 08/19/2019 13:33
- Post subject:
|
|
Bold move P4k, bold move.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Skinny
birdman_handrub.gif
|
- #9507
- Posted: 08/19/2019 14:40
- Post subject:
|
| Hayden wrote: | | Bold move P4k, bold move. |
Didn't 1989 originally get 8.something and BNM?
_________________
2021 in full effect. Come drop me some recs. Y'all know what I like.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
revolver94
professional dilettante
Gender: Male
Age: 29
Location: DC suburb
|
- #9508
- Posted: 08/19/2019 15:55
- Post subject:
|
| Skinny wrote: | | Didn't 1989 originally get 8.something and BNM? |
no they didnt review, tho i think they put it in the 30s on their year end list. funnily they DID review the ryan adams cover album.
re: the scores, pitchfork definitely being a bit revisionist by doing this... like never would they have given these scores if for some reason theyd felt inclined to review these albums at the time. really solidifying them as followers vs the tastemakers they used to be in the early oughts.
i am happy red was the highest scorer tho, definitely my favorite swift album. a bit ridiculous to say fearless is better than 1989 tho lol.
_________________
My top songs of the 2010s
and
Spotify link
Last.fm
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Hayden
Location: CDMX
|
- #9509
- Posted: 08/19/2019 16:33
- Post subject:
|
Probably the first time I've ever thought Pitchfork was hacked.
I figured they'd give 1989 a mid-8 and the rest high 6s, low 7s (maybe 5s?). The fact they gave Red a 9 is bizarre  Like, really bizarre. I don't think the 2012 staff gave a single damn about it, and that puts it in a similar tier with A Crow Looked at Me, The Idler Wheel, Lonerism, The Seer, Skeleton Tree, Blonde, RTJ2, Psychic, Teen Dream, James Blake, etc... top 25 of the decade material. From what I can tell, it's the highest praise/score the album's ever received from a publication.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad somebody loved it enough to give it that score, people enjoying things is good, but what? The album has three iffy-ish pop hits and a remaining tracklist of directionless meh. It's fun and all, but I don't think BEA's 61/100 is too far off the mark.
Last edited by Hayden on 08/19/2019 16:38; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
Skinny
birdman_handrub.gif
|
- #9510
- Posted: 08/19/2019 16:34
- Post subject:
|
| revolver94 wrote: | no they didnt review, tho i think they put it in the 30s on their year end list. funnily they DID review the ryan adams cover album.
re: the scores, pitchfork definitely being a bit revisionist by doing this... like never would they have given these scores if for some reason theyd felt inclined to review these albums at the time. really solidifying them as followers vs the tastemakers they used to be in the early oughts.
i am happy red was the highest scorer tho, definitely my favorite swift album. a bit ridiculous to say fearless is better than 1989 tho lol. |
They didn't even review it? Seems like a bizarre oversight.
_________________
2021 in full effect. Come drop me some recs. Y'all know what I like.
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
