Posted by Trung
on 2/1/2012, 3:08 am, in reply to "well, uh, that's not how it works with me"
110.175.228.247
It is of my opinion that with arts. You either like something or you don't. Then after you got the conclusion of how highly you rate the album. You create reasons and premise to justify your conclusion. This is opposite to basic logical arguments which are creating conclusion after examining the validity of the premise.
I don't think people have a checklist when listening to music where they mark against the standards and then decide whether they like something or not.
Nevertheless, I think when people examine the albums that they do like and albums they don't like. Over time you would find trends on things that link together all the albums you consider to be great and all the bad albums and in the end that creates the bias/framework/criteria that the likes of starostin likes to go on about.
In any case, I do think having an analytical eye on your music is a good thing because you learn more about your subjective bias and that guide you in predicting whether a music would appeal to you or not after reading someone else analysis on that music.
--Previous Message--
: i used to fastidiously review every new
: release i got, on my blog
:
: then i realised the more analytical i got
: about it, the less i enjoyed it
:
: these days, i just kick back and
: "hear"
:
: --Previous Message--
: I don't think Trung is trying to
: compartmentalize anything so much as just
: trying to get a grasp on what made the way
: for what. I don't think it's influencing
: what Trung likes so much as it is intriguing
: to him from an intellectual perspective.
:
: I'm the same way. I love to absorb music
: history and culture, and whereas some may
: see it as limiting, I see it as helping me
: enjoy things more. I gain a great
: appreciation for something when I hear it in
: context, and that goes for stuff that's been
: well-trod and stuff that hardly anybody
: listens to.
:
: There's nothing wrong with thinking deeply
: about the music you enjoy and why you enjoy
: it. It just makes it sound even better to
: me.
:
: --Previous Message--
: i've come to the point, that if i like it, i
: like it
:
: who cares what others think? or what
: compartment it's in?
:
: i listen to stuff from The Gerogerigegege
: (hardcore noise grindcore) to Justin Bieber
: (you know what that is)
:
: --Previous Message--
: ahh, the topic was requesting a good book
: recommendation. Or was what you are talking
: about a book that specialises on Robert
: Johnson.
:
: I have a feeling that for me to get an
: overview over the technical development of
: rock music, I have to buy good books on
: numerous individual bands throughout rock
: history rather than one book that summarises
: it all.
:
: I guess the current frustration I have right
: now is that, sometimes listen to music (or
: even sometimes I write music) that I think
: sounds unique and original. However because
: I don't know the development of rock music,
: I can't say for sure whether it is original,
: revolutionary etc. I have question John
: Mcferrin in this forum about not using
: originality as a primary and major criteria
: for rating music. Although I do try and
: defend it, a part of me thinks that perhaps
: the reason why I am arguing this is because
: of my own ignorance of originality.
:
: An example, Midnight Oil album Head
: Injuries. To me that is one of the most
: unique albums I have ever listen to and I
: would like to call it a revolutionary album.
: Why? Because it merges post-punk music with
: hard rock. It's like imagining that Johnny
: Marr or Peter Buck or Robert Smith join
: AC/DC and they had a punkish lead singer.
: Where the songs alternates from jangly
: pop-ish intricate guitar playing, or even
: gothic like gloomy music and then launches
: in a fiery kick ass riffs and guitar solo.
: Sort of merges the anti-guitar hero and
: guitar hero style guitar playing so well (I
: personally give it a F in McFerrin scale as
: I think it just pure brilliance and there
: isn't another album in my music collection
: that sounds like that album)
:
: However, I never heard anyone describe that
: album as a landmark revolutionary album (not
: even Midnight Oil fans do that as I have a
: feeling that they like the band more for the
: politically orientated lyrics more than
: anything else). I don't know about the
: history of rock to say conclusively whether
: that is a revolutionary album as maybe
: someone has done it before and I never heard
: of it. Maybe someone has done it afterwards
: and therefore it is not as unique as I
: thought it was. I don't know.
:
: I guess, I would like to know more so I can
: make statements like that (I sort of wonder
: where does Starostin gets the information
: from when he boldly declares an album to be
: "revolutionary")
:
: I also feel it would help my songwriting to
: get a clearer idea of what has been done
: before, so I can have a stab of being
: "original"
: --Previous Message--
: I used to think "post-punk" as
: bass-driven with a monotonal beat myself,
: but that sub-genre covers a lot of ground,
: basically it was anything that flowed from
: the 1st wave of punk, and even includes funk
: elements and dub-reggae.
:
: As for "power pop", it basically
: just means anything that is catchy with
: simple chords, whilst the focus being mostly
: on guitars. And yes, lyrics do play a part,
: they're usually sappy love songs.
:
: I don't think wiki is all that incorrect
: over these two genres, and there's basically
: a lot of debate over them by music geeks.
:
: As for first "rock and roll
: artist", there's an even bigger debate
: - from Ike Turner to Louis Brown. I'd throw
: in my 2 cents and say Robert Johnson cos he
: fits the archetype.
:
: And if you want a technical discussion of
: Johnson's style, you need to buy a book, as
: none of that info will ever be given free.
:
: Hope I'm of help.
:
: K. Thx. Bai.
: --Previous Message--
: Wiki seems ok for a brief overview and the
: major artist of a particular genre but I'm
: guessing I'm looking for more specific
: technical innovation.
: Such as quoting Jonathan review of Robert
: Johnson "He also pioneered the entire
: idea of playing a bass line over the melody
: of the actual song, at the same time and on
: the same guitar as the actual song, and
: while singing at the same time as doing all
: of that"
:
: How would someone know that information
: without look up a specific biography of that
: artist itself (which in all honesty kind of
: defeats the purpose because I'm kind of
: looking for artist to discover).
:
: I also think that wiki goes to very little
: detail over the stylistic of a genre. Their
: definition of post-punk doesn't seem
: particularly satisfactory to me. Is it just
: introverted and experimental punk music?
:
: From my listening to bands who are
: considered post-punk, I concluded that those
: bands tend to have songs that are
: bass-driven and strong emphasis on the
: rhythm section and the guitar being used for
: more textural effects and that post-punk
: bands tends to have a singer-songwriter
: attitude (although not always).
:
: I'm not too sure if my conclusion matches
: with the official definition of that genre,
: nevertheless I don't see many genre
: definition goes into technical description
: of the music and who exactly was responsible
: for that development.
:
: ___
: It's interesting though reading the wiki
: about how there are no specific "first
: rock and roll song or artist". Yet
: Starostin boldly claim that little richard
: is the first rock and roll artist and I
: don't see little richard being quoted as
: even a nominee to th e first rock and roll
: artist in the wiki page.
:
:
: another curious thing, starostin was quoted
: in the rock music wiki "Starostin
: argues that most of what is traditionally
: called "power pop" falls i into
: the pop rock subgenre and that the lyrical
: content of pop rock is "normally
: secondary to the music."
:
: Now that I think about it but doesn't that
: definition of pop rock music seems weird.
: When I think about pop music, I generally
: don't associate the pop genre to be any more
: or less emphasis to lyrics as any other
: genre. I consider art rock and prog rock
: music to be more emphasis on the music than
: the lyrics whilst something like folk or
: singer-songwriter to be more focus on the
: lyrics.
: --Previous Message--
: just start with the generic "rock"
: label and work from there
:
: they have links to sources for further
: reading at the end of each subject
:
: --Previous Message--
: Despite learning a lot from reading some of
: these reviews site. I still feel like I'm
: still in a bit of a dark about the history
: and development of rock and roll and I still
: can't really pin point the various
: revolutionary and advancement of rock music
: beyond the basic well known events (such as
: Dylan going electric, Sgt. Peppers etc).
: Even in George Starostin website where he
: assigns album as "revolutionary",
: a lot of the times I still don't know why
: they were revolutionary (I still have no
: idea how the police somehow reinvent the
: structure of the pop song like George claim
: etc).
:
: I guess considering that one of the criteria
: of rating music that people bring up is
: "originality", even if I do one
: day decide to take major consideration in
: originality, I wouldn't be able to because I
: don't know what is original.
:
: So I'm hoping there would be some good
: resources for me to look up about the
: development of rock music. I did see the
: rolling stones "history" of rock
: music but considering that a lot of people
: reckon that they are hostile to prog rock, I
: didn't buy it.
:
: Also anything that recommends me more good
: music and albums would be great.
:
: Does anyone know any good books or even
: videos or documentaries that gives me a good
: overview.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
: