Quality in music - subjective or objective? Good and bad taste?

[WildRanger]

Your views? You've got three separate questions in the poll.

What is a 'quality' in music to you? Is it subjective or objective?
If you don't like or can't get into something in music, does it mean it sucks or not?
Can someone's taste in music be (objectively) marked as good/bad and what is the criteria for that?
Discuss.










 

[Crow]

music is subjective this isn't even a discussion

[Adami]

Didn't we already have this thread? Or am I blurring the 60000 times this topic has topic has already been discussed?

[WildRanger]

Didn't we already have this thread? Or am I blurring the 60000 times this topic has topic has already been discussed?

I don't know. I didn't see it.

[The Walrus]

music is subjective this isn't even a discussion

Thread over.

[ariich]

music quality is subjective this isn't even a discussion

Thread over.

Fixed but otherwise yeah.

[ChuckSteak]

1) Entirely subjective

2) If I like or dislike something it only means it is good/bad to me, not as an universal truth or fact.

3) There is no good or bad taste, but I think the more interested you are in music, the more open you are and the broader is your taste in general. People who are raised on a diet of radio and MTV define what they like by what is generally and socially accepted as "good". It is a question of fitting in. Nobody wants to be excluded from the group. So if you want to be "cool", you just HAVE to like certain things, you know..

[WildRanger]

music is subjective this isn't even a discussion

Thread over.

No, it's not. We need a discussion. You can't reply with just word and it means that's all, because this thread needs some explanations.

For example, if someone claims that Katy Perry is a great music artist and David Bowie sucks, is he objectively WRONG for that statement? Does he have a bad taste, in your opinion?

[Elite]

For example, if someone claims that Katy Perry is a great music artist and David Bowie sucks, is he objectively WRONG for that statement?

No.

Though he would be wrong for 'claiming' that as being the truth, because it isn't. (Neither is the other way around)

Does he have a bad taste, in your opinion?

That's irrelevant.

[ariich]

Does he have a bad taste, in your opinion?

That's irrelevant.

Yeah, that's a really weird question. "Does he objectively have bad taste, in your subjective opinion?"

Obviously there are plenty of things in music and indeed any artform that can be measured or assessed objectively. But whether that piece of art is actually good or not is subjective because it comes only down to whether the listener/viewer/whatever likes it based on their own personal criteria.

Every time this comes up, someone tries to argue that it is objective, or partly objective, but all their arguments rely on a set of criteria being the definition of "good" that most people wouldn't even agree with.

[bosk1]

music is subjective this isn't even a discussion

Thread over.

No, it's not. We need a discussion. You can't reply with just word and it means that's all, because this thread needs some explanations.

No, it really doesn't.  You seem to love trying to create the appearance of controversy where there is none, but that doesn't mean every question is a legitimate question.