Can Music Be Objectively Good?

[Implode]

I want to see what you guys all think.

To what extent can music be objectively good? If there is objectively good music, what are some qualities that makes it good?

[sonatafanica]

Björk.

[juice]

Dream Theater.
Devin Townsend.

[skydivingninja]

Not even a band as revered as the Beatles can be labelled as "objectively good."

[Adami]

Yes and No.




Kind of.

[Implode]

All well versed answers, guys. 

I want to know more of the aspects of the music though, not just bands. Like, why is DT good? I think it has some to do with putting meaning and hard work into a song...of course...but there's more to it.

[LieLowTheWantedMan]

Dark Side of The Moon.

/thread

[Implode]

/thread

Not yet.

Dark Side of The Moon.

Why?

[LieLowTheWantedMan]

/thread

Not yet.

Dark Side of The Moon.

Why?

Well I'll admit, DSoTM is only my third favourite Floyd album, behind WYWH and Animals. But DSoTM is one of the only albums in the world where I personally wouldn't change a single note, and I honestly can't find anything wrong with it. Plus, I don't know anyone personally who dislikes it (though I'm sure most of you might).

[zxlkho]

I don't dislike it, but I certainly don't care for it much. Animals is the only Floyd album that I've listened to and absolutely loved.

[skydivingninja]

All well versed answers, guys. 

I want to know more of the aspects of the music though, not just bands. Like, why is DT good? I think it has some to do with putting meaning and hard work into a song...of course...but there's more to it.

DT is good to lots of people because their songs have a sweeping, majestic, epic feel without feeling cheesy (even on songs like ITPOE), decent lyrics (excluding the last few albums), and excellent performers combined with plenty of well-constructed songs.  That's why I like them, and why plenty of people like them, but it doesn't make those aspects of the music objectively good or bad. 

[Gorille85]

Objectively good music does not exist.

[Dimitrius]

I don't dislike it, but I certainly don't care for it much. Animals is the only Floyd album that I've listened to and absolutely loved.

I'm kinda on the same boat as this, though I like WYWH also. But don't trust my judgement, I'm the resident PF hater here.

[Genowyn]

I don't think music can be objectively good, but it can certainly be objectively bad.

[KevShmev]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHozn0YXAeE

[j]

No.

-J

[Adami]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHozn0YXAeE

1. That song rocks.

2. The keyboardist, she's pretty cute.

[Portrucci]

Music can be objectively superior to another piece of music, for example, Beethoven's 9th Symphony is objectively better than a song I make by farting into a microphone for 10 minutes. However there is always personal preference and someone might really, really like my farting song. Should this mean objectively is obsolete? I don't think so. We don't have to be so incredibly strict on these definitions.

Can a piece of music be objectively good by itself? Loosely, yes. An album or work that has achieved (close to) unanimous praise I would consider objectively good, regardless of whether it 100% holds to the implication that everyone who hears it will like it. I don't think objectivity in music is something to get particularly worried about, it should neither allow people to feel superior to others nor should it mean that all music is created equal. Some works of art ARE just that good that the majority of people will find them appealing. That's about as objective as we can get.

[ariich]

Objectively good music does not exist.

This.

I don't think music can be objectively good, but it can certainly be objectively bad.

That makes no sense.

Music can have objective characteristics, and aspects of music can have objective quality (such as technical proficiency, for example), but none of that directly links to whether it is good or not. Whether something good or bad is entirely subjective.

[ariich]

Can a piece of music be objectively good by itself? Loosely, yes. An album or work that has achieved (close to) unanimous praise I would consider objectively good, regardless of whether it 100% holds to the implication that everyone who hears it will like it. I don't think objectivity in music is something to get particularly worried about, it should neither allow people to feel superior to others nor should it mean that all music is created equal. Some works of art ARE just that good that the majority of people will find them appealing. That's about as objective as we can get.

So the most popular stuff is the most objectively good? Because, frankly, that is the only possible way to objectively measure quality, and even that is VERY tenuous.

[jsem]

What's good or bad music is in the eye of the beholder.

[SPNKr]

I know some objectively good music like Hendrix, Coltrane, Zeppelin, Floyd. Not all music though. I think most "classic" music is.

[Portrucci]

Can a piece of music be objectively good by itself? Loosely, yes. An album or work that has achieved (close to) unanimous praise I would consider objectively good, regardless of whether it 100% holds to the implication that everyone who hears it will like it. I don't think objectivity in music is something to get particularly worried about, it should neither allow people to feel superior to others nor should it mean that all music is created equal. Some works of art ARE just that good that the majority of people will find them appealing. That's about as objective as we can get.

So the most popular stuff is the most objectively good? Because, frankly, that is the only possible way to objectively measure quality, and even that is VERY tenuous.

Is my fart song objectively worse than Beethoven's 9th? If yes, music isn't entirely subjective. If you answered no, I'll pm you the link 

Sure that's an extreme example, but I don't understand why people get so relied up about objectively, like it somehow ruins music. No it doesn't, it just means that there are aspects about music which are GENERALLY preferred to other aspects. Does this mean everyone will prefer these aspects? No. If you want a semantic argument, you win. But if we are talking loosely about the concept. Yes it exists in music.

[Ultimetalhead]

As much as I wish it could be, music is one of those things that is not objective at all. Period.

[Portrucci]

There are fantastic, critically acclaimed albums which millions of people adore and which have very few detractors (said detractors usually citing a personal taste criteria rather than any other 'objective' criteria). Is this album objectively good? Close enough I say. Not 100% (no piece or art ever will be) but I think the word can be satisfactorily used in that vein. I also think musical discussion would be very boring if everyone just accepted that music is entirely subjective (ie, everyones opinion is correct) 

[Zantera]

Objectively good music does not exist.

Pretty much this.
I can hear music myself, and think "hey, this is pretty good even though i dont like it", but i don't feel like there's any artist or band, where the whole world could unite and say "this is good".

[bodiesinflight]

No, but individuals can attempt to make objective decisions as to whether something is good or not.

[Bombardana]

No.

[Sigz]

There are fantastic, critically acclaimed albums which millions of people adore and which have very few detractors (said detractors usually citing a personal taste criteria rather than any other 'objective' criteria). Is this album objectively good? Close enough I say. Not 100% (no piece or art ever will be) but I think the word can be satisfactorily used in that vein. I also think musical discussion would be very boring if everyone just accepted that music is entirely subjective (ie, everyones opinion is correct) 

My problem with this is that I don't consider a general or even an overwhelming consensus to mean objective. Objective to me implies a conclusion that can be reached logically, and whether a given song is good or bad doesn't fall under that.

[AcidLameLTE]

Unless you're briang, no.

[Jamesman42]

I thought it was clear that music cannot be objectively valued? Otherwise, it is no longer a total artistic expression/experience, but a system to be followed.

[Perpetual Change]

Here's my take:

All music is objectively good. People just have bad subjective experiences with some of it.

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

As long as bands like Nickelback and Creed exist, I will never be able to believe that music can be objectively good.

I wouldn't believe it anyway as it's all a matter of personal interpretation, but still.

[lordxizor]

Music can be objectively more complex or more difficult to perform, but one piece of music cannot be objectively better than another.

[TheOutlawXanadu]

It cannot because in order to measure quality, one must make criteria, which will be different for everyone.

Furthermore, whether or not people will admit it, how good one thinks a particular piece of of music is is influenced greatly by things like expectations, preconceptions and how much that person actually wants to like what they are hearing in the first place.