Best Singer of All Time is...

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

1 hour ago, AudioDoctor said:

Objectively, Britney is just a cheap american knock off of Kylie...

 

and Kylie is better. By better I mean, she is listenable.

 

 

 

 

😜Well Kylie in from Oz, so objectively speaking that makes her better right away !!👌

[fas42]

There are Fiats ... and then there are Fiats ...

 

 

 

[GregWormald]

I'm not an expert in anything but psychotherapy.

The words "objective" and "better/worse" always lead me to ask "What are the criteria and who gets to set them?"

I wouldn't let clients use those words without full specifications being provided.😄

 

[AudioDoctor]

3 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

😜Well Kylie in from Oz, so objectively speaking that makes her better right away !!👌

 

You're right, she comes preloaded with a sexy accent...  😉

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 hours ago, GregWormald said:

I'm not an expert in anything but psychotherapy.

 

So you are here to drum up business, huh!🤣

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

Well objective can mean not influenced by personal feelings or opinions when representing facts; something that is real or not imagined; something that is without bias or prejudices.

 

So what if something can't be directly measured and verified? Can a juror or an art critic be considered objective by some of the above definitions?

 

It gets murkier. Objectively speaking, if truth is determined by our senses, and our senses are subjective, is truth subjective? Phenomenological psychologists might argue that a verifiable fact such as the colour blue being blue may not be true for everyone because phenomena are experienced differently.

 

Idealism revolves around the philosophy that reality is dependent on ideas. Apparently according to Kant objective reality cannot be known, it is just a subjective experience but I think he conceded that there was objective reality nonetheless. Constructivist theories point to mental constructs or ideas that explain sensory experience and even measurements. Everything is a construct of the mind.

 

In this way I can be certain that Kylie Minogue is superior in every way to Britney Spears and Sinatra was the best singer!🤣

[JoeWhip]

11 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You guys kill me. Judging art is the most preposterous thing. 
 

I saw Britney Spears in concert. Extremely entertaining. She was far better than Mozart. Prove me wrong. 

Well, when you saw her, Mozart had been dead for a few hundred years, so you are right in that respect. 🤠

[sphinxsix]

8 hours ago, GregWormald said:

I'm not an expert in anything but psychotherapy.

 

Subjectively or objectively, Greg.? 

'Our childhood experiences influence our adult life' - not true, true and if so subjectively or objectively..? 

 

 

11 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You guys kill me. Judging art is the most preposterous thing. 

 

If it wasn't for 'judging art', every book about e.g. Dutch baroque painting would have to include thousands of names..  

Often quite difficult to pronounce .. 

 

 

Same with music. 

We just don't have that much time for reading, do we 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, GregWormald said:

The words "objective" and "better/worse" always lead me to ask "What are the criteria and who gets to set them?"

I wouldn't let clients use those words without full specifications being provided.😄

 

14 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I must disagree. Someone’s opinion that Mozart is better than Britney is fine, but there’s no such thing as objectively better in art. 

 

12 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

Yes, there is. As a person who studied art history I can assure you, Chris that there are criteria of 'objectively better' in art and I'm sure that can apply to music as well although I am not formally educated in this field. Probably someone here is..

 

11 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

As for history of art - there are quite many tools of analysis of an 'art form' used to evaluate a particular painting or a particular painter. One more example - which artist of a given period did master chiaroscuro better. I'm sure there are similar tools in the field of history of music, there simply have to be.. But like I said - I'm not formally educated in this field...

 

... but I actually don't think I have to be to compare e.g. 'Ooops' with 'Requiem'. In this case one could IMO start with the very basic elements of the music structure of a given composition which are harmonic and rhythmic complexity. Is there someone here who would quarrel that 'Ooops' is more sophisticated and complex in this regard of the two.? 

Let me ask the same questions as far as the lyrics of both pieces are regarded... 

BTW I understand very well people who don't like classical music, still 5-6 years ago I thought of it as of in most cases utterly boring. Now classical is for me the main source of excitement in my musicophile life  but it doesn't have to be to everyone, that would be quite a totalitarian attitude. I actually tend to also think of people who interested only in classical music as of the ones who loose some very important (for me!) things in their music life too..

And I'll repeat once again - I quite like 'Ooops'..

Really 

 

 

[JoeWhip]

Not to go even further off into the wilderness, but a question. Is a singer who uses auto tune to correct his or her pitchiness or flubs on recordings and even live really a singer? Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

[JoeWhip]

7 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

You're right, she comes preloaded with a sexy accent...  😉

You mean a concept sort of like this?

 

[photonman]

13 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I saw Britney Spears in concert. Extremely entertaining. She was far better than Mozart. Prove me wrong. 

You have been to a lot of concerts!  There is another idea for a thread.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

... but I actually don't think I have to be to compare e.g. 'Ooops' with 'Requiem'. In this case one could IMO start with the very basic elements of the music structure of a given composition which are harmonic and rhythmic complexity. Is there someone here who would quarrel that 'Ooops' is more sophisticated and complex in this regard of the two.?

 

2 hours ago, sphinxsix said:

Let me ask the same questions as far as the lyrics of both pieces are regarded... 

 

 

This makes no sense to me. If the artists were trying to create the same thing, based on a reference standard, then we could look at their versions and compare how close they came to the reference. 

 

Why would you compare harmonic and rhythmic complexity? You don't even know what the goal of each artist was at the time of song creation and which is better, more or less complex? 

 

You certainly aren't saying the most complex is the best right? The most complex is the most complex. That's it. 

[AudioDoctor]

42 minutes ago, JoeWhip said:

You mean a concept sort of like this?

 

 

I guess. I don't think my accent is an aphrodisiac though. I also have never been to Vegas but Love Australia and New Zealand.

[JoeWhip]

Funny thing. I know plenty of Brits who have moved to the US. One family had two younger teenaged boys. They at first asked their dad how to lose  the accent to fit in better, until they found out that the ladies loved it. There is a similar scene in the film Love Actually. Funny though, my American accent has never such an effect in the UK, which is fine as my wife wouldn’t particularly like that. BTW, the pic is of an advert on the Tube in London I took a few years ago. They have some great ones in the Tube but this is my favorite,

[PYP]

9 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

So you are here to drum up business, huh!🤣

 

After reading the thread thus far, I think I might need some help....

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, PYP said:

 

After reading the thread thus far, I think I might need some help....

Some of us could've told you that long before this thread :~)

[botrytis]

17 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

Objectively, Britney is just a cheap american knock off of Kylie...

 

and Kylie is better. By better I mean, she is listenable.

 

 

 

 

 

Also Kyle writes her own music. She also does her own choreography.

[botrytis]

 

Here is a singer that just kills it. I have seen her live and she puts her all into every show. When I saw her she had to be carried off stage she was so tired.

 

Let's see if Britney can last this long, with this women's story also. Bettye LaVette....

[daverich4]

22 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 there’s no such thing as objectively better in art. 

I ran the Digital Imaging Studio @ The San Francisco Art Institute for four years and I suspect every member of the faculty would disagree with you. 

[PYP]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Some of us could've told you that long before this thread :~)

 

how about a group session?  seems we could use it.  

[The Computer Audiophile]

29 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

I ran the Digital Imaging Studio @ The San Francisco Art Institute for four years and I suspect every member of the faculty would disagree with you. 

I actually suspect they wouldn't. 

 

Think about it, there are no criteria for creating art and no goals that all artists strive for when creating art. Thus, there can be no such thing as objectively better. 

 

Who is better Rembrandt or Matisse? It's actually even a stupid question because one is creating apples and the other is creating oranges. If there is an objectively better art, then there is an objectively better style and that makes no sense. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Which is better? Both paintings and both pointillism.

 

 

[PYP]

15 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Which is better? Both paintings and both pointillism.

 

 

 

the second.  I never gave permission for my portrait!

[PYP]

I'm not sure about "better" but, to me, great art can cause a state of awe, not just enjoyment.  Standing in front of a huge Matisse (if my memory is correct) at the National Gallery, I was literally frozen in place and it was if a wind was blowing by me.  That to me is "high" art.  Mozart often calms me immediately and puts the crazy world into perspective.  If that happens for some folks with BS, that is great.  It just doesn't for me.  It does get a bit complicated when BS is also selling sex appeal.  That doesn't seem fitting somehow and I'm not being prudish here.  It has its place (everywhere in advertising, for example), but isn't the main point in "high" art.  

 

I can explain more during our group session with the audiophile shrink.  

[JoeWhip]

I mean no disrespect to you PAP and your  unauthorized portrait, but I would rather have the bottom one hanging on my wall. 🤪