theo parrish s/d

I never tossed them off, I simply said they are not empirical laws.

And of course there are lots of classical musicians who love him. Just as there are lots who hate him, have never heard him, listen to rap music, like sugar on their breakfast cereal, think society is in the gutter, don't believe in global warming.....

x-post I wish I was a physicist quite often, I'm just not good at it!

xxpost to ronan, pot calling kettle. it wants its handle back.

anyway, i apologise for framing my original point in such stern terms. i was reacting against someone else's being unreasonable. let's just leave it as this: i'm glad discernment exists. even if it's not exactly the same for everyone.

x-post i'm going to allow that!

any fucking moron who knows shit about notation and rhythm structure is going to hear that Hieroglyphic Being is more rhythmically complex.

But why does this make it better?

arguments about radicual subjectivity have no actual end, and no point.

well ronan, i'm not trying to have an argument here, and i'm certainly not angry. only you are. within my world (subjective!!), saying all djs are as good as theo parrish and villalobos is patently absurd. and there are obviously no limits to subjectivity, per se. but there ARE limits to the people whose opinions you choose to even register.

-- resolved, Wednesday, July 23, 2008 4:51 PM (26 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

the cult of parrish and villalobos is unbearable

would rather bump dj pharris legends of house mix than either
suck it

i don't really care, deej. get back to freestyling over wearemonster

oh i agree, i wasnt suggesting that. i just wondered why rhythmically complex was important. with there being thousands of records more rhythmically complex than Our Day Will Come, yet only a hundred or so that could be described as better than Our Day Will Come

TP, i wasn't arguing about something more rhythmically complex being better than something that isn't. i was arguing that there are most definitely objective ways of defining certain aspects of music, especially when comparing one music (or track) to another.

that, and Ronan, pitch is actually a fact-- though perceived pitch is most certainly not a fact (environmental factors, etc).

sure and notes are a fact etc.....but what someone thinks of them is always an opinion

i dont understand your point. ronan is wrong to like certain artists because there are common perceptions between people regarding characteristics of some recordings

xp

i quit. but for real guys:

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g91/sophraves/874658934_l.gif

why do you think trees is saying ronan is wrong about anything? as i understand it he's saying there are objective ways of judging a piece of music which, in theory, enable you to make a value judgement on it. nothing is entirely objective, least of all the interpretation of scientific results!

i'd be happy if for the purposes of all ilm threads from now on we just assumed i didn't like any music whatsoever....maybe I'll just change my login.

resolved otm in fairness. not much to do with music taste anymore.

I dont think ktbwould be hard to tell ronan under a different login.

All facts are facts. However when facts are brought to a table, someone somewhere decided which facts to bring to the table.

And which to leave behind.

I hope their judgement in deciding which facts to bring was a good judgement!

why do you think trees is saying ronan is wrong about anything? as i understand it he's saying there are objective ways of judging a piece of music which, in theory, enable you to make a value judgement on it. nothing is entirely objective, least of all the interpretation of scientific results!

-- resolved, Wednesday, July 23, 2008 5:28 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

... arent you making his argument now?

I've actually completely lost faith in Ronan as a critic because of this thread. It makes me sad.

-- the table is the table, Wednesday, July 23, 2008 4:54 PM (40 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

why???

Or "it would be", posting from an iPhone in a moving car is the bomb.

resolved, of course nothing is entirely objective, but the radical subjectivism that ronan has been pouring forth is just patently absurd to me.

everyone has an asshole and an opinion.

people base their opinions on many different factors, some of which might have to do with objective facts and some which might not.

the earth keeps spinning.

are you implying that ronan is ignoring some objective facts when drawing conclusions?

give specific examples

no deej, i'm not 'making his argument', i just have reading comprehension, something which you apparently lack. and if ronan wants to be your friend, he'll be your friend. calm down.

and Ronan, I actually do respect you and your taste in music. I just disagree quite vehemently with your subjectivism.

i dont care about ronan, im just trying to figure out how anyone can make an argument that ultimately amounts to "we should all agree about these subjective matters"

resolved, of course nothing is entirely objective, but the radical subjectivism that ronan has been pouring forth is just patently absurd to me.

we're on the same page, here.

but table there are no objective facts in music, or none you've proven anyway.

or if there are....yet to hear a good case for them.

why does nobody without a musical agenda to prove ever argue in favour of a strong objective truth in music?

or if some academics have done so, why is their work never cited by these musical heretics? because the "facts" always seem to centre around one or two godlike auteurs, not actual theory/discussion?

x-post this has zero to do with me or my musical taste....I could like japanese polka and be making this argument.

people base their opinions on many different factors, some of which might have to do with objective facts and some which might not.

tiesto is the best dj in the world, based on the objective fact that tiesto draws far more people to see him spin than any other dj in the world

im sure ronan is frequently 'wrong' in the sense that i would disagree with him, but surely no more than pipecock, whose opinions about rap music are about as laughable as geirs on dance music. for a dude who is all about racial authenticity etc he sure has a pretty narrow caricature of blackness hes following. i bet pipecock has a much better hit rate w/ dance music but one of the reasons im on ronans 'side' here is that u guys really need to realize that this YOURE TOO SUBJECTIVE argument sounds really ridiculous

, im just trying to figure out how anyone can make an argument that ultimately amounts to "we should all agree about these subjective matters"

trees has never made this argument...? my statements up thread, yes, make this argument. but i don't agree with them, particularly. i'm happy liking what i like, and that some other people like what i like. i'm also happy never really spending any time thinking about any of this. hmm, perhaps i should get a sub to the daily mail...

yes it's not even a side.......the reason I'm being persistent on this thread is because I believe in subjectivity more than anything else in the entire world....in fact it's one of the only beliefs I feel supremely confident about.

Well then proving anything shouldn't even fucking matter to you.

Sudjectivity can fucking have ten million gerbils shoved up its ass.

o_O

table can you give an example of criticism/opinions you approve of? not trying to snark here, genuinely wondering what youre looking for here.

xpost if anyone would enjoy such a thing, it's gonna be subjectivity.

I think the point Ronan trying to make is that if Person A is discussing with Person B and Person B is saying this is objective, fact, it is what it is, then it makes that topic dead, it makes person A's view an irrelevance, either the fact is accepted. or it is not.

If person B says ok its not an objective fact, then there is room for dialogue. Perhaps even a beer

if Person A is discussing with Person B and Person B is saying this is subjective, nothing is better than anything else, it is what it is, then it makes that topic dead, it makes person A's view an irrelevance.

Does it? Can't A win B over to A's point of view. or vice versa. They could hold the same subjective view

Or why not send a text?

if everyone's opinion is equally valid about everything then why bother listening to anyone's opinion

i guess lots of people don't!

And isn't person A saying actually this Mingus record is a lot better than that Kenny Larkin record!

anyway, i agree with what you're saying, obviously. i don't know if anyone on this thread, pipecock aside, really thinks like Person B though.

Everyone opinion is equally valid! But i trust your opinion more than many other peoples! perhaps as much as 40% more!

that is the issue, max.

My argument from above about Hieroglyphic Being, for example-- one could criticize his music for being TOO rhytmically complex for dancing music, or one could jam out to it all night. It is still rhytmically complex.

One could argue that Tiesto's swells are superbly placed within a track, or one could argue that Tiesto's swells are much too obvious and uninteresting. They are still swells.

Get my drift?

comparatively

Opinions about the objective elements within music can and in fact SHOULD differ from person to person, but that doesn't change that those objective elements exist.

On the train on the way home i stood with a tall person.

As we went past the basketball court later, I thought perhaps he wasn't tall really. It may well have been a trick of the light