Jump to content
IGNORED

Is some music better than other music?


Recommended Posts

Then what are the right questions?

 

Regarding the issues that your raised, I don't know that there are any. There are no standards against which to measure what is art and what is not. It's amorphous, if I may use that term. I suppose the only important question is what the individual appreciates and considers to be art. Many will choose to defer to the judgments of "society as a whole" but, in large part at least, those are people who lack either the confidence or knowledge to trust their own aesthetic sense or judgment. Bear in mind, of course, that I am talking about serious endeavours. I have no problem agreeing with you that flights of fancy, such as "Purple People Eater", were never intended to be treated as more than light entertainment with no artistic ambitions.

"Relax, it's only hi-fi. There's never been a hi-fi emergency." - Roy Hall

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - William Bruce Cameron

 

Link to comment

The word "art" requires creation. The "artist" creates. The performer, on the other hand, performs an artist's creation. Sometimes it is their own, sometimes it is someone else's. Sometimes it is someone else's and they add their own interpretation.

 

So the word "art" for me is not about "better" or "worse" but about the act of creation. Everything else is the value judgement of someone other than the artist which matters not because it cannot change the creation which has already happened.

 

On the other hand, the enjoyment of art is an emotional response that is triggered by the art in the observer. This emotional reaction is independent of the value of the art which is, in fact, the result of creation. One should not mistake the enjoyment by the observer (emotional, rational, spiritual) for the act of creation by the artist.

 

What makes great art seems to be that the creation is enjoyed over longer periods of time by many people of many backgrounds. However, this is a false value that is a result of the art industry, not an actual measure of the greatness of the art.

 

Let's take a great musical work. Let's say it is captured in writing and replayed by accomplished musicians who each in their own way and for generations interpret it for audiences who enjoy it around the world. That is our normal definition of great.

 

But what if the exact same piece had been played improvisational to a small room and not recorded at all. Those present would witness the greatness and since it was identical to the previous example, it would be equally great. Yet it will never be heard again. The greatness existed in the creation itself.

 

This lack of a second playing does not diminish the greatness one bit. The greatness is inherent in the act of creation. It is simply joyful fortune that many great works have been recorded on paper or in audio recordings.

 

With music, this is easily understood by lovers of live jazz or blues. But it is no less true with painting or other artistic creation. We just have a harder time thinking of the moment of creation as the art when there is a solid form left over instead of notes hanging in the air that vanish as the sound decays.

 

John

Positive emotions enhance our musical experiences.

 

Synology DS213+ NAS -> Auralic Vega w/Linear Power Supply -> Auralic Vega DAC (Symposium Jr rollerball isolation) -> XLR -> Auralic Taurus Pre -> XLR -> Pass Labs XA-30.5 power amplifier (on 4" maple and 4 Stillpoints) -> Hawthorne Audio Reference K2 Speakers in MTM configuration (Symposium Jr HD rollerball isolation) and Hawthorne Audio Bass Augmentation Baffles (Symposium Jr rollerball isolation) -> Bi-amped w/ two Rythmic OB plate amps) -> Extensive Room Treatments (x2 SRL Acoustics Prime 37 diffusion plus key absorption and extensive bass trapping) and Pi Audio Uberbuss' for the front end and amplification

Link to comment
Then what are the right questions?

 

Mmmm... I take a slightly different viewpoint. Art is something created for people to enjoy. It does not have to meet any other criteria, though it is obvious there is great art, fine art, performance art, and who knows how many other nuances.

 

The fact that the artist was renumerated for his creation is irrelevant. Surely you know all the great composers had patrons? And people do not usually play in an orchestra for free. Etc.

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
The fact that the artist was renumerated for his creation is irrelevant. Surely you know all the great composers had patrons? And people do not usually play in an orchestra for free. Etc.

In the US, we still don't make it easy for even our most creative people to pursue their art. In the immortal words of Michael Hill, "...maybe someday our heroes will get paid while they're alive".

 

61K7suNPRpL._SL290_.jpg

Link to comment
In the US, we still don't make it easy for even our most creative people to pursue their art. In the immortal words of Michael Hill, "...maybe someday our heroes will get paid while they're alive".

 

61K7suNPRpL._SL290_.jpg

 

I think this has always been true, at least in the main. It is, unfortunate, but then again, not all artists have the capability to be "great."

 

-Paul

Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat DAC.

Robert A. Heinlein

Link to comment
Mmmm... I take a slightly different viewpoint. Art is something created for people to enjoy. It does not have to meet any other criteria, though it is obvious there is great art, fine art, performance art, and who knows how many other nuances.

 

The fact that the artist was renumerated for his creation is irrelevant. Surely you know all the great composers had patrons? And people do not usually play in an orchestra for free. Etc.

 

Reminds me of an exhibition of DaVinci's pencil sketches in a notebook he kept. When you viewed it, the sense of these sketches being alive was overwhelming. They were so simple, so minimal, sketches for things he would later turn into full blown paintings. He had patrons, and hundreds of years later I am glad he did.

 

I have also seen his full works in various parts of Italy. Even more overwhelming. Are there other worthwile artists that maybe didn't get partonage? Probably. You have no way of knowing. In music, paying at least a little bit doesn't bother me. What bother's me is how little of what you pay they get. I do believe in the future (and in some cases it already is so) direct payment to the artist will result in many more making a living though probably fewer making a huge living and becoming millionaires. I think artists would agree. They don't necessarily need to be filthy rich. Making a good living and sharing their art is enough.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
They don't necessarily need to be filthy rich. Making a good living and sharing their art is enough.

Reading this really made me want to respond - but I can't think of anything to say that's not potentially inflammatory. So I'll let someone else we all know and love say it for me.....

 

church-lady-isnt-that-special.gif

Link to comment
Reading this really made me want to respond - but I can't think of anything to say that's not potentially inflammatory. So I'll let someone else we all know and love say it for me.....

 

 

I did say good living. Not minimum wage, not barely getting by, not wondering if working at Walmart is better since it pays more. I did say with direct payment maybe more artists will make a good living. A good living. I did NOT say, it bothers me if they get filthy rich, or that those who have shouldn't have. I simply said, it was my opinion in the future fewer artists would get rich. Not that fewer artists should get rich. Only fewer would.

 

And yes, I think most artists, though of course wanting to be rich as much as the next guy, would say making a good living and sharing their art is enough. It is more than many currently get.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment

I think now days you have to be 'hot' to get filthy rich, singing talent is optional :)

Analog: Koetsu Rosewood > VPI Aries 3 w/SDS > EAR 834P > EAR 834L: Audiodesk cleaner

Digital Fun: DAS > CAPS v3 w/LPS (JRMC) SOtM USB > Lynx Hilo > EAR 834L

Digital Serious: DAS > CAPS v3 w/LPS (HQPlayer) Ethernet > SMS-100 NAA > Lampi DSD L4 G5 > EAR 834L

Digital Disc: Oppo BDP 95 > EAR 834L

Output: EAR 834L > Xilica XP4080 DSP > Odessey Stratos Mono Extreme > Legacy Aeris

Phones: EAR 834L > Little Dot Mk ii > Senheiser HD 800

Link to comment

Corrected:

 

Now days you have to be 'hot and filthy' to get rich, singing talent is optional :)

Positive emotions enhance our musical experiences.

 

Synology DS213+ NAS -> Auralic Vega w/Linear Power Supply -> Auralic Vega DAC (Symposium Jr rollerball isolation) -> XLR -> Auralic Taurus Pre -> XLR -> Pass Labs XA-30.5 power amplifier (on 4" maple and 4 Stillpoints) -> Hawthorne Audio Reference K2 Speakers in MTM configuration (Symposium Jr HD rollerball isolation) and Hawthorne Audio Bass Augmentation Baffles (Symposium Jr rollerball isolation) -> Bi-amped w/ two Rythmic OB plate amps) -> Extensive Room Treatments (x2 SRL Acoustics Prime 37 diffusion plus key absorption and extensive bass trapping) and Pi Audio Uberbuss' for the front end and amplification

Link to comment
Corrected:

 

Well played... Correction accepted :)

Analog: Koetsu Rosewood > VPI Aries 3 w/SDS > EAR 834P > EAR 834L: Audiodesk cleaner

Digital Fun: DAS > CAPS v3 w/LPS (JRMC) SOtM USB > Lynx Hilo > EAR 834L

Digital Serious: DAS > CAPS v3 w/LPS (HQPlayer) Ethernet > SMS-100 NAA > Lampi DSD L4 G5 > EAR 834L

Digital Disc: Oppo BDP 95 > EAR 834L

Output: EAR 834L > Xilica XP4080 DSP > Odessey Stratos Mono Extreme > Legacy Aeris

Phones: EAR 834L > Little Dot Mk ii > Senheiser HD 800

Link to comment
They don't necessarily need to be filthy rich

Sorry if I'm misinterpreting this, but it sure sounds like a value judgment to me. My problem with this is that it's not for you or anyone else to say who "needs" to be rich. Artists, like doctors and insurance sales people and architects and grocers and everyone else have the right to set their own life goals. Having been a working musician for 50 years, I can promise you that many formerly idealistic artists & musicians come to regret that that they didn't amass a larger asset base as they mature. I know too many outstandingly creative people who are progressively more bitter as they pass through middle age because of this.

 

We openly decry artists who pursue commercial success with work that seems far below them - but they're the ones who chose to become filthy rich, and they have every right to do so. Artists don't necessarily need to be poor either.

Link to comment
Sorry if I'm misinterpreting this, but it sure sounds like a value judgment to me. My problem with this is that it's not for you or anyone else to say who "needs" to be rich. Artists, like doctors and insurance sales people and architects and grocers and everyone else have the right to set their own life goals. Having been a working musician for 50 years, I can promise you that many formerly idealistic artists & musicians come to regret that that they didn't amass a larger asset base as they mature. I know too many outstandingly creative people who are progressively more bitter as they pass through middle age because of this.

 

We openly decry artists who pursue commercial success with work that seems far below them - but they're the ones who chose to become filthy rich, and they have every right to do so. Artists don't necessarily need to be poor either.

 

Sorry, you aren't hearing me. Yes, the statement nobody needs to be filthy rich is a value judgement. Paul McCartney is worth an estimated $600 million to perhaps $1.2 billion. That is filthy rich. Madonna is pegged at around $800 million. Ditto for her. A number of hip hop stars are worth a few hundred million. Yes, it is my judgement no one needs to be that rich.

 

Again, however, I did not say they didn't deserve it, couldn't strive for it or whatever. I said I thought such richness might be less common in the future. But more artists in the middle might make good livings. Maybe that is slightly above middle income, maybe it in the few millions. Yes, it is a value judgement that hundreds of millions is more than enough. I have not made the value judgement that someone with more is wrong, but no they don't need it.

 

I don't think sports stars, doctors, bankers or anyone else needs that kind of money. In terms of art I don't know that such riches improves the art. At least sometimes it does the reverse. So okay, whatever, if I offended you sorry. It was not a statement about the worth of artists being less than someone else. More a statement no one needs that kind of money. And they don't. They might covet it, might work for it, might get it. No one needs it.

 

Here is a recent 10 richest musical artists list. #10 is $440 million.

 

http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/6334796/madonna-paul-mccartney-worlds-richest-list

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
Sorry if I'm misinterpreting this, but it sure sounds like a value judgment to me. My problem with this is that it's not for you or anyone else to say who "needs" to be rich. Artists, like doctors and insurance sales people and architects and grocers and everyone else have the right to set their own life goals. Having been a working musician for 50 years, I can promise you that many formerly idealistic artists & musicians come to regret that that they didn't amass a larger asset base as they mature. I know too many outstandingly creative people who are progressively more bitter as they pass through middle age because of this.

 

We openly decry artists who pursue commercial success with work that seems far below them - but they're the ones who chose to become filthy rich, and they have every right to do so. Artists don't necessarily need to be poor either.

 

How did they decide not to "amass a larger asset base"?

Did they produce lesser quality work?

Or they chose to charge less for it?

 

R

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
How did they decide not to "amass a larger asset base"?

Did they produce lesser quality work?

Or they chose to charge less for it?

 

R

They decided to produce what pleased or fulfilled them despite its lack of commercial appeal. I knew lots of musicians who wouldn't dirty themselves by playing weddings and bar mitzvahs like I did. I put myself through college and medical school with money to spare doing what was beneath them. So I still have many friends in the business who are now in their 50s, 60s and older facing retirement with no appreciable savings, no pensions, and progressive physical limitations on their ability to perform (e.g. arthritis, hearing loss, joint pains, heart failure etc). They can't do back to back $50 gigs every night any more, and they can no longer break into the commercial market (which is half dead anyway because of disc jockeys). They truly chose this path, even if they were oblivious to the consequences.

 

I've been playing for about 25 years for a Louisiana bluesman who's in the Louisiana Blues Hall of Fame, won a WC Handy award, and has 12 CDs on good labels since 1990. He had cardiac surgery a few years ago at about 58 y/o and was back on the road within 2 weeks despite having had a sternotomy (one of the most painful incisions in all of surgery - and the pain lasts for many weeks) because he couldn't afford to miss the gigs. He's one of the finest people I've ever known - his lyrics really speak to me, and he's been writing and performing the music he loves for years despite an abysmal pay scale. He's typical of a large number of artists and musicians who pursue their passions but pay a high and lifetime price for that freedom.

 

FWIW, many if not most of those who devote themselves to amassing millions must have an emotional need to do so. It's not for any of us to say how much money is "enough" for anyone else - and there are many kinds of need. I'm not saying I think it's right - but I also make it a practice never to count other people's money.

Link to comment

I've been playing for about 25 years for a Louisiana bluesman who's in the Louisiana Blues Hall of Fame, won a WC Handy award, and has 12 CDs on good labels since 1990. He had cardiac surgery a few years ago at about 58 y/o and was back on the road within 2 weeks despite having had a sternotomy (one of the most painful incisions in all of surgery - and the pain lasts for many weeks) because he couldn't afford to miss the gigs. He's one of the finest people I've ever known - his lyrics really speak to me, and he's been writing and performing the music he loves for years despite an abysmal pay scale. He's typical of a large number of artists and musicians who pursue their passions but pay a high and lifetime price for that freedom.

 

Re bar mitzvahs, how well does Hava Negilah scan as a blues? :)

 

If it wouldn't violate some confidence, what's your friend's name, and does he have recordings for sale?

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
Re bar mitzvahs, how well does Hava Negilah scan as a blues? :)

 

If it wouldn't violate some confidence, what's your friend's name, and does he have recordings for sale?

 

MI0002288535.jpg?partner=allrovi.com

 

I've never worked with or for a better person. Larry's the real deal - he's an honest, honorable man who tells his life experiences in great songs that are both entertaining and educational. And his CDs are available on Amazon as well as many other sites and stores. My favorite album is "You Got To Live a Little".

Link to comment
They decided to produce what pleased or fulfilled them despite its lack of commercial appeal. I knew lots of musicians who wouldn't dirty themselves by playing weddings and bar mitzvahs like I did. I put myself through college and medical school with money to spare doing what was beneath them. So I still have many friends in the business who are now in their 50s, 60s and older facing retirement with no appreciable savings, no pensions, and progressive physical limitations on their ability to perform (e.g. arthritis, hearing loss, joint pains, heart failure etc). They can't do back to back $50 gigs every night any more, and they can no longer break into the commercial market (which is half dead anyway because of disc jockeys). They truly chose this path, even if they were oblivious to the consequences.

 

I've been playing for about 25 years for a Louisiana bluesman who's in the Louisiana Blues Hall of Fame, won a WC Handy award, and has 12 CDs on good labels since 1990. He had cardiac surgery a few years ago at about 58 y/o and was back on the road within 2 weeks despite having had a sternotomy (one of the most painful incisions in all of surgery - and the pain lasts for many weeks) because he couldn't afford to miss the gigs. He's one of the finest people I've ever known - his lyrics really speak to me, and he's been writing and performing the music he loves for years despite an abysmal pay scale. He's typical of a large number of artists and musicians who pursue their passions but pay a high and lifetime price for that freedom.

 

FWIW, many if not most of those who devote themselves to amassing millions must have an emotional need to do so. It's not for any of us to say how much money is "enough" for anyone else - and there are many kinds of need. I'm not saying I think it's right - but I also make it a practice never to count other people's money.

 

I can understand that the large majority of the population can't or won't ever reach "maturity" when it comes to understanding music, literature, cinema, etc., but it's sad to see so many entertainers (that produce simplistic and sometimes vulgar stuff) making lot's of money while those involved in creating and interpreting more complex and expressive works are often stuggling to survive...

Ironically, it is that the latter that will go down in history.

 

This gripping book narrates short moments in the lives of some of them.

 

R

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
it's sad to see so many entertainers (that produce simplistic and sometimes vulgar stuff) making lot's of money while those involved in creating and interpreting more complex and expressive works are often stuggling to survive

I agree completely. But I feel the same way about paying someone $10 million a year to throw a ball through a hoop or knock one over a fence with a stick. "Sadly", most people in the US share neither concern.

 

The basic business proposition is simple - those people are paid so much because they return more money than they cost. Ticket prices for major league sports would plummet if there were no demand. Broadcast rights would cost much less if there were fewer viewers. Sports paraphernalia and memorabilia would bring far less if they weren't so desired. And if all that were the case, we wouldn't be paying players so much money. Similarly, if demand for orchestra tickets were high, the prices would also be high and the musicians would make more money.

 

Most contemporary art seems to me to have been purchased as decoration rather than as expression. Kenny G (who's actually a fine musician despite the music we all know and snore to) brings in the bucks with an audible version of sleeping pills. Looking for what's right and proper is a fool's errand - I just try to roll with the punches.

Link to comment
What's especially disturbing about that list is that only one or two of those people have really contributed anything worthwhile to popular music as a cultural art form, IMO.

 

wwaldmanfan, which one(s)? Curious.

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place". George Bernard Shaw.

Link to comment
If you have to ask, #2. A few of the others have had some staying power as entertainers. The rest have no discernable talent that I can see, but I must be missing something.

 

I would add 6 and 9 along with 2. I'm not much of a fan of the others on the list but obviously somebody is.....:)

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place". George Bernard Shaw.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...