What is "good" music?

any music where the artist displays an obvious artistic capability lyrically and musically without the reliance of computers/other people is good music, unless there's no lyrics.
examples in my head ATM are Buddy Holly, Paul Weller, and Michael Giacchino.

Hehe. :3

Personally, I only view such things as incomplete or complete based on the artist's perspective.

Art's complexity is rather intriguing that way. x3

Being mainstream doesn't automatically make it garbage, it just so happens that the two coincide. Very, VERY often. People shouldn't use the word mainstream as such.

Music's an art. People can have different tastes, but there's a fine line between good art and bad art. Don't think so?
Example:


Now, which one is better?

I haz lotsa fun wif dem Stick Flash games and the like~

Depends on what you're trying to convey and such~ :3

Like whether or not the person drawing the above image truly wanted more detail or not~

Incomplete or complete and all dat~

Perception is not truth. All things follow laws, and those laws are truth. Music must follow those same laws and by following those laws it becomes good. I can't blow into a rusty trumpet and claim the noise it produces is good music because I perceive it to be. I am not qualified to explain exactly what it is that makes good music but I can certainly say that most of what listen to in modern culture doesn't qualify. But even though it may not be technically good it can still be enjoyable.

Hey, Sarah, please rate, by your knowing truth of things, globally, this song from 1 to 10. I want an accurate answer, based on truth. Please be sure to ask an expert if you need to.

[video=youtube;jsPLgWGPNYw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPLgWGPNYw[/video]

Being mainstream doesn't automatically make it garbage, it just so happens that the two coincide. Very, VERY often. People shouldn't use the word mainstream as such.

And I'll tell you why. When a song is played constantly, 24/7, some people are bound to get used to it. Doesn't really matter how the song is.

I like and listen to a bit of mainstream here and there but I really like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_jam and Dubstep.

Music's an art. People can have different tastes, but there's a fine line between good art and bad art. Don't think so?
Example:
Now, which one is better?

Try comparing the Mona Lisa to something of higher value. Right now you're comparing Bach to someone farting in a jar, if you'd like to translate that comparison into music.

Try something along the lines of picking two artists with completely different styles and subject matters, each with people that genuinely like one more than the other for purposes other than just not liking it to be cool. That's more how musical comparison is. So, try this instead:





Which one is better?

"Well, the Mona Lisa is pomegranate because seriously, it's too plain. What's going on in it? It's just a boring picture of a girl."

"I disagree, I find the Mona Lisa to be a fine piece of art that really stands out in how realistic paintings could be in a time long before photographs. It really captures the-"

"Yeah, I feel you, but seriously. Check out The Persistence Of Memory. It's a work of art. It really speaks to you."

"Yeah, it tells me someone randomly scribbled some pomegranate on the page and it was suddenly DEEP artwork. Look at a;; the pomegranate that's going on in it, and it's not nearly as skillfully made as Lisa"

"Skill doesn't matter, look at the message it's giving. It's much stronger than some plain girl staring at you."

There you go.

I ws making an example to point out that there's a line between good and bad and different tastes.

If you're to compare artists, they best be from the same time frame ; Renaissance Era, try Leonardo da Vinci who worked on the Mona Lisa in comparison to Donatello Buonarroti, who worked on "David" and "The Separation of Sky and Water", etc. The comparisons have to be near the same time era, or else it's unfair and not only that, but it'd have to be two famous works. Basically what Spidey said, always beating me to the punch.

Words and such~ :3

But...don't you like those cute stickman drawings and animations and stuff?

I personally like all art so it's the same to me. xD

I ws making an example to point out that there's a line between good and bad and different tastes.

No, actually, you were making a line between "hundreds of hours spent" and "lolseconds".

Half arsed MS Paint Style can fit well, if you do it well.

Exaggeration to prove a point.
Also, I spent hours on that masterpiece MS paint picture.

Exaggeration to prove a point.

Southperry policy is to ignore reality in favour of weak rationalizations. Therefore, good means whatever they think is good must be truly good.

Exaggeration to prove a point.
Also, I spent hours on that masterpiece MS paint picture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Exaggeration to prove a point.

Actually, no point. You are just exploiting the fact that almost nobody prefers a half assed MS Paint drawing before a fine drawing almost identical to reality.

A majority of people can think the same, but that doesn't make it better. Imagine that, in a close future, People see realistic drawings like that like a waste of time, because we have photographs, and everyone loves Half assed MS Paint drawings, because they don't exist in reality, and it's a fresh change. Is your pomegranatety drawing then a piece of art bigger than Leonardo's?

Southperry policy is to ignore reality in favour of weak rationalizations. Therefore, good means whatever they think is good must be truly good.

Still waiting your true answer.

Eh, true @false dilemma.
My point was that people can still use the "different tastes" thing in order to justify that an artist who puts little effort/no effort into their works (and it shows) is actually good, which would be wrong.

Actually, no point. You are just exploiting the fact that almost nobody prefers a half assed MS Paint drawing before a fine drawing almost identical to reality.

A majority of people can think the same, but that doesn't make it better. Imagine that, in a close future, People see realistic drawings like that like a waste of time, because we have photographs, and everyone loves Half assed MS Paint drawings, because they don't exist in reality, and it's a fresh change. Is your pomegranatety drawing then a piece of art bigger than Leonardo's?



Still waiting your true answer.

Don't care what you're waiting for. You've already proven you're incapable of differentiating between truth and preference, I don't intend to sit there and pick apart some god awful mixture of sounds (listened to about a minute of it) in order to make a point I've already made that you've already ignored and will likely continue to ignore.

Southperry policy is to ignore reality in favour of weak rationalizations. Therefore, good means whatever they think is good must be truly good.

Actually, if you'd look at my first post in the thread you'd see I posted one very nice track and one that I considered pomegranate even though I like both of them. However, I'm sure there are people that find the one I consider pomegranate to be amazing, and the other that I actually consider to be good music to be pomegranatety with something like "it's boring" or "too soft" or "pretentious pomegranate" or "Japanese music".

None of which actually explain why the song itself would be considered bad though, more like they're explaining why they don't like the song. The one I consider pomegranate is pomegranate because there's pretty much no singing talent, the instruments (although I will say are arranged uniquely) are everywhere. Then again, that pretty much fits with the crappy vocals. The song itself doesn't really evoke much emotion, it's more for listening than actually moving. The lyrics are at least artistic in their own way though.

Eh, true @false dilemma.
My point was that people can still use the "different tastes" thing in order to justify that an artist who puts little effort/no effort into their works (and it shows) is actually good, which would be wrong.

This I agree with, but at the same time effort doesn't always equate to a better product. Not to completely throw the idea out though, I usually prefer music that doesn't sound like it had a computer randomly generate the song itself while someone autotunes over the computer generated track.

Don't care what you're waiting for. You've already proven you're incapable of differentiating between truth and preference, I don't intend to sit there and pick apart some god awful mixture of sounds (listened to about a minute of it) in order to make a point I've already made that you've already ignored and will likely continue to ignore.

No, no, no. See, you claim to be able to rate something bad, but then, claim to be incapable to rate anything else.

If you can just say what is truth, and what is not, it can be an interesting chat. But you are just saying "I know the truth, you don't". Which is quite arrogant, actually, considering you can't even use it to score something accurately, according to the universal score it should have, according to you.

And about that song, the first minute and half approximately is just setting the atmosphere. But whatever, I guess it's not into your tastes.