Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kosh on August 19, 2007, 05:00:59 am
-
http://youtube.com/watch?v=LNllPl_1Wqg&mode=related&search=
-
I agree :yes:
-
You could do the same about pretty much any music genre.
I'm sure if the internet existed in the 50's there would have been youtube videos about how rock and roll would encourage the end of western civilisation and how it was evil.
-
You could do the same about pretty much any music genre.
Classical music excluded!
I'm sure if the internet existed in the 50's there would have been youtube videos about how rock and roll would encourage the end of western civilisation and how it was evil.
I really don't know if rock and roll was dangerous or not. I bet that there would have been plenties of videos against Hippies and their "let's do nothing!" philosophy.
-
You could do the same about pretty much any music genre.
I'm sure if the internet existed in the 50's there would have been youtube videos about how rock and roll would encourage the end of western civilisation and how it was evil.
Then again it didn't glorify gangbanging
-
Rap & Hip-hop realyl are hte bottom...well, allmost..
I heard some experimental "artistic" music... sounded like someone was torturing a dozen cats while a elephant was stomping around a fine glass shop with a Saturn V rocket in his ass... :shaking: :eek: :ick:
Regardles, rap is for the untalented - you don't have to have a good voice for it, there's no "real" music , only a repeating beat that a 2 years old can reproduce. Let's face it - EVERYONE can rap..that alone tells you the quality... :doubt:
-
Whats the point?
:wtf: why not just beat the living **** out of misaligned people.
-
The point is that the so called Rap is useless and dangerous. It can't even be considered a music genre.
-
I don't think you can completely get rid of rap. It's been around too long and is too far ingrained in American culture. However, rap, and other forms of music (like death metal, etc.), need to be a little more regulated when it comes to who can purchase the albums, as many of their lyrics revolve around violence towards certain groups of people.
-
It is part of American..."culture"?
Rap is not invincible. If you can scary crazy drives with terrible crash videos, you can scary rapper fanatics with videos showing their patheticity.
-
Rap is a part of American culture, more so, it's the voice of the ethnic American culture. They feel generally stepped on, and rap is (or was) a way of expressing themselves. Ironically, the people that they feel (I'm not saying if they actually do or not) oppress them picked up on it, commercialized it, and now sell it all bottled up and nicely packaged. That's why all you get nowadays is the "thug" rap, about the *****es and hoes and whatnot - because that's what sells, so that's what the record companies pick up, and in order to get picked up and make money, that's what people rap about. It's really another case of capitalism ruining art.
Note: I don't like rap (can't really stand listening to 99% of it), but I do appreciate it's original intentions.
As to the video, I only briefly looked at it, but it looks like one of those overreacting pieces of trash that raves about how awful something is without truly understanding why it's bad. It also smacks slightly of of a religious background/objective.
-
Rap just sounds like some one talking with music in the background to me.Even 5 year olds can rap.(Did I say that i dislike rap?)
-
Anyone who can think for him/herself doesn't need this kind of videos. And for the rest, it is programming of mind without consent. Propaganda.
Hardly less disgusting than anything that it finds so wrong in rap music.
-
The video does have a point regardless...rap is crap. And well, people are shaped and modled in most part by their culture.
People keep complaining that the USA is going going South (rotting, getting worse), a process that most of the ppl I know think started around 1970-80. You got to ask yourself why. I'd say rap definately is ONE of the reasons (after all, a culture is formed from many smaller things).
-
Theres nothing wrong with Rap.
Popular culture is only a symptom.
The acceptance of ****ty rap is a sign of society breaking down and failing to raise children properly. Similarly to hippies and rock, the rock and role didn't make them into drug addicted zombies. Singers become popular because people buy their stuff.
The kids are buying this stuff because they've got money to spend, time to waste, and simply don't know better.
-
I do not have a problem with rap, per se... just so long as people who listen to it listen to it far FAR away from me. :p
What I do not like is when people use the term: "rap music". Oxymoron. Rap is not music. Music requires three parts: melody, harmony, rhythm. Rap has one... on rare occasions two, but never all three parts.
-
Music requires three parts: melody, harmony, rhythm. Rap has one... on rare occasions two, but never all three parts.
:wtf:
-
add good lyrics (usually a requirement if ther'es a ctually a "singer")
It has none of htat too...in 99,99% of all cases
-
It has none of htat too...in 99,99% of all cases
:wtf:
You mean 100%!!!
-
Oh yea Rap is actually called (C)Rap. :P
-
I only have a problem with rap when I see white suburban kids "relating" to it.
-
Theres nothing wrong with Rap.
Popular culture is only a symptom.
The acceptance of ****ty rap is a sign of society breaking down and failing to raise children properly. Similarly to hippies and rock, the rock and role didn't make them into drug addicted zombies. Singers become popular because people buy their stuff.
The kids are buying this stuff because they've got money to spend, time to waste, and simply don't know better.
They don't know better? If they did "know better", what music would they buy? The kind you like?
Oh, and I agree with Swantz.
-
Sure, its not music. Sure, it promotes idiocy/violence/promiscuity. Sure, all the people who I know who like it happen to be dumb as a rock, and make themselves look like it too.
But you know what? I go to death metal concerts, wear all black and chains, and bang my brains out while listening to violent, agressive music so I suppose the only difference is that metal is actually music instead of poetry. Altho all my metalhead friends happen to be the smartest people I know but thats most likely because they simply despise the mainstream. Rap is in the mainstream, metal is not. and no, Atreyu, Linkin Park, and Sum 41 are NOT metal.
But the idea is a novel one, well it once was. If you look at very early groups such as NWA you'll notice that they are taking elements of poetry, (at this time usually associated with white upper class) and completely changing the atmosphere and audience from a sheltered introspective one to a more real and gritty one, and adding a beat to better accentuate the meter and rhythm of the poem. Of course all the popular rap (just like all the pop and rock music of today) is just commercialized bull****, but I think some merit can be found in the genre if you just dig in a bit.
I only have a problem with rap when I see white suburban kids "relating" to it.
Yeah, there is no excuse for that. Way too many people in my suburb like that. Rich, kind parents, and they act like theyve actually struggled once in their life. Listen, enjoy, but keep your thoughts of thuggin' and gang bangin' in your head please, because one walk into downtown Detroit where REAL social problems previal will probably change their attitude quite a bit. Sad thing is my suburb is only 4 miles from Detroit...
-
I'm actually quite surprised at the sheer number of people on this thread whose opinions have basically amounted to "I don't like it, so it should be banned"
Congratulations on basically being Jack Thompson on an different hobby horse.
-
Banning any kind of media is one of the worst things imaginable. Once you take away one Freedom, others follow.
-
Well I don't personally like rap, but hip-hop and breakbeats will forever hold a special place in my heart. Not all the things that it started are necessarily bad, here's a couple of links to beat boxing. I think no-one can say that would be too easy. The reason I don't like rap is that I think that the current rap artists are not too good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHg4iZ0rCDM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8mlSWWZ9zQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLN63bRcY5I&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV_X17iP0AQ (in the end the beat and the chorus at the same time)
Now if only one person could do also the verses...
-
If they did "know better", what music would they buy?
Music that would not make every normal person in earshot feel uncomfortable?
Just because we have freedom of speech does not mean all taboo subjects became good fodder for public display.
Some things are meant to be enjoyed in private by responsible persons. The content of some rap songs is the audible equivalent of porn.
Which, most of us would agree, does not belong in the middle of a street or in a school.
-
I'm actually quite surprised at the sheer number of people on this thread whose opinions have basically amounted to "I don't like it, so it should be banned"
Congratulations on basically being Jack Thompson on an different hobby horse.
LOL...oh that's rich... hating rap = being a nut like Thompson...
Banning any kind of media is one of the worst things imaginable. Once you take away one Freedom, others follow.
I can immagine worse things...a lot of them. Freedom is a illusion anyway...a overrated one at that.
-
Spoken like Jack Thompson would. Bravo.
I smell idoicy. And have a horrible urge to counterpoint each and every one of you who complained rap is the only genre that does this or that. But I'll refrain, because by saying so you've proved you have no contact with popular culture at all and wouldn't know what I'm talking about.
Irredeemable genres are difficult to create. I can even find an occasional country song I like. If you can't find rap you like, then look harder. But more to the point, you are demanding the banning of something for a style that is apparently on its way out. True, the gangsta ain't exactly rushing offstage, but he ain't been looking all that healthy either. Less of the rap I hear normally is oriented in that fashion. Nelly ain't preaching the same thing as Dr. Dre or Eminem was, lest you forgot to notice.
You could make a better factual case for the destruction of metal than you could for rap.
I also find it vaguely interesting that, in certain moods, I find some of gangsta subgenre at it's worst (when it's advocating mayhem and murder on a large scale...sound familar Nuke?) excellent. After some consideration the reason I like D12's Instigator and the totally unrelated Clubbed to Death by Rob Dougan is actually quite similar. I don't scream when I get mad. My anger runs cold. Thus to date I have had no use for metal, which embraces the opposite path. No excuse to identify with it for suburban white kids? Not quite. Granted I'm no longer either suburban or a kid, but then again, when I was I still did. The term your brain is probably trying to reject at this point in time is feel, I just happened to have the willingness to self-analyze and reach deeper than the lyrics for why I identified with it. My reason is hardly the only one; it just happens to be the only one I can explain to you, not being a party to anybody's decisions but my own.
-
I'm actually quite surprised at the sheer number of people on this thread whose opinions have basically amounted to "I don't like it, so it should be banned"
Congratulations on basically being Jack Thompson on an different hobby horse.
LOL...oh that's rich... hating rap = being a nut like Thompson...
I would have thought my point was easy enough to understand but if you need a longer explanation.....
You may not like rap. You may hate it with the heat of a thousand suns. But that doesn't mean you have any right to say that it should be banned simply because you don't like it.
And if you want to claim gangster and violent imagery is a reason to get rid of it, try stating that case in an argument that couldn't be used to ban Grand Theft Auto.
See how the people trying to ban it are just like Jack Thompson now?
-
You know we're watching X-Files with the light on,
We're Dans le Maison,
I hope the smoking man's in this one....
Rap is a 'first step' in some ways, just like around 90% of Rock'N'Roll music in the 50's was actually pretty generic and poor (Rockin' Robin etc), there were only a few Gems for every hundred or so artists. A lot of Modern Rap is directionless, people have forgotten where it came from and 'Hanging in the Ghetto with my Ho and my Bling' isn't where it came from.
There's still some good quality Rap out there, but like, for example Punk or Britpop, it gets hidden under an enormous pile of 'generic sellers', rappers that don't perform about money and women, but about more personal things. If you want to destroy crap music, it's probably better to look to the distributors and advertising companies than to the artists themselves. It's these companies that make this kind of music, be it Rap, Rock or anything appear to be the only kind out there and give it its' popularity.
-
I'm actually quite surprised at the sheer number of people on this thread whose opinions have basically amounted to "I don't like it, so it should be banned"
Congratulations on basically being Jack Thompson on an different hobby horse.
LOL...oh that's rich... hating rap = being a nut like Thompson...
I would have thought my point was easy enough to understand but if you need a longer explanation.....
You may not like rap. You may hate it with the heat of a thousand suns. But that doesn't mean you have any right to say that it should be banned simply because you don't like it.
And if you want to claim gangster and violent imagery is a reason to get rid of it, try stating that case in an argument that couldn't be used to ban Grand Theft Auto.
See how the people trying to ban it are just like Jack Thompson now?
Did I say it should be banned? Discouraged, maby, but banned? Hell, it makes it easier for me to indentify...shall we say "personas of questionalbe tastes and mental faculty"?
-
Did I say it should be banned?
Did I say you said it?
I suggest you read more carefully what I'm saying.
-
I feel that anyone who uses "rap" and "crap" in the same sentence is dumber than a bag of hammers. As for the video, they would have gotten their point across better if it was titled OMG BAN BLACK PEOPLE (and wiggers too). I suggest you guys check out Saul Williams (http://www.last.fm/music/Saul+Williams (http://www.last.fm/music/Saul+Williams)).
-
Yay, let's generalize and declare opinions as facts !
Also, rap is a music/lyric art form (if you like it or not). A lot of you who declare rap to be crap actually seem to refer to a part of the hiphop culture, namely thugz, pimps and white trash suburb wannabe gangbangers. The later has about as much to do with rap as FOX News has to do with journalism.
-
pfft "mainstream" rap they haven't had an original thought since Biggie and Tupac got shot. "Mainstream" Rap songs over the past decade are consistently about bling, hoes, rims, and whatever the fanciest car is currently done over a different background music. Its pretty much just advertisements now a days that's pretty sad actually, considering it use to tell a story back in the day. Whatever culture relevance it had in the 90s is so long dead by now its a stagnant genre. Occasionally they come up with a new word that becomes "hip" until some interior designer n the home and garden channel uses it incorrectly to describe light fixtures :p
It doesn't need t be banned but it certainly could be renvigorated so that it can again recive a little relvance and prestige
-
Meh...There's crap rap and better rap, that's true. Not all of it is 100% bad....
But at the end of the day ALL of rap is inferior to allmost every other type of music out there..Rock' PwnZ rap 100%. Classical? Pwnz everything.
-
Trashman, music is objective. Classical happens to put me to sleep, unless it has some stilleto-style violins. I'm sorry, but your argument (and the majority of the anti-rap arguments in this thread) amount to "Their music is inferior, mine is better. If they were enlightened like me they'd stop listening to their music and listen to mine."
Give it a rest folks. There's going to be a lot of things you happen to not like in the world, so just shut up and ignore them if they bother you that much. At the very least, stop calling for the abolishment of things you don't agree with (and yes I agree with the Jack Thomspon sentiment posted earlier by Kara).
-
I sleep with the fact that there is a 99% chance if you rap, you can't carry a tune. So keep rappin' and I'll keep laughin'. :p
-
Classical Music, on it's own, is like Film Music, if anything I find lyrics can detract from the emotional impact of the music, that's why music with lyrics is written differently to Ambient style music.
Rap itself has several variants, 'Scatman John' comes to mind, that's a version of Rap, you could say stuff like Ian Dury or the Stranglers used a form of 'Rap', maybe not in the quick-fire staccato of modern rap, but it still comes in through the same door.
A lot of modern classical and Ambient I'm not all that fond of, most of them are pretty generic, just like most other genres at the moment, but every so often something special comes along like 5th Element or Aeon Flux soundtracks :)
-
I heard some experimental "artistic" music... sounded like someone was torturing a dozen cats while a elephant was stomping around a fine glass shop with a Saturn V rocket in his ass... :shaking: :eek: :ick:
was it stallaggh?
-
A lot of modern classical and Ambient I'm not all that fond of, most of them are pretty generic, just like most other genres at the moment, but every so often something special comes along like 5th Element or Aeon Flux soundtracks :)
Totally loved that latin-sounding number during the taxicab scene in the beginning :)
-
No excuse to identify with it for suburban white kids? Not quite. Granted I'm no longer either suburban or a kid, but then again, when I was I still did. The term your brain is probably trying to reject at this point in time is feel, I just happened to have the willingness to self-analyze and reach deeper than the lyrics for why I identified with it. My reason is hardly the only one; it just happens to be the only one I can explain to you, not being a party to anybody's decisions but my own.
I mean wiggers. I don't like wiggers. The kids/adults/people who take the rap seriously and want to BE what it describes. You know the types of people I'm talking about.
-
One thing I think we can all agree upon is that cultural icons that glorify and encourage thug culture in children deserve to have their heads lopped off, whether it be rap, rock, hip-hop, or classical...?
With that said, it's time to purge the world of all the god rotten awful thug rap artists and try to look for some decent quality stuff. Bone, Thugs, And Harmony is a prime example of what rap should have been today. We need more pre-96 rappers. That's not an opinion, it's a fact.
-
i dont think more rappers is a solution to the problem.
while rap is totally void of decency, they are rather good at stroking the capitalist phallace. they only get away with it because theyre making so many people so much money. if varg had a multi billion dollar contract, he would probibly still be out there killing off his bandmates and lighting churches on fire.
-
I mean wiggers. I don't like wiggers. The kids/adults/people who take the rap seriously and want to BE what it describes. You know the types of people I'm talking about.
But that's a good thing! Think about it: 50 years ago, African-Americans were widely thought of as second-class citizens. Nowadays, most white teenagers want to be African-American! If that ain't progress, I don't know what is.
-
Trashman, music is objective. Classical happens to put me to sleep, unless it has some stilleto-style violins. I'm sorry, but your argument (and the majority of the anti-rap arguments in this thread) amount to "Their music is inferior, mine is better. If they were enlightened like me they'd stop listening to their music and listen to mine."
Give it a rest folks. There's going to be a lot of things you happen to not like in the world, so just shut up and ignore them if they bother you that much. At the very least, stop calling for the abolishment of things you don't agree with (and yes I agree with the Jack Thomspon sentiment posted earlier by Kara).
"De gustum non discutabilis" - one does not discuss tastes....WRONG I bet whoever said that didn't want to discuss HIS tastes. Humans discuss everything - from everyday things to strnage phenomena, abstract concepts to even things as unfantomable as God... And you're tellimg me music tastes are out? :lol:
If anything its one of the things that can be discussed - there are thing that can be quantified (at least approximately) in music - such as complexity, patterns, number of instruments, quality of vocals, "color" of the voice...things like that.
Things happen to have qualities and values regardless of what someone thinks of them..me or you. I don't like "War & Peace" for instance, but despite that I can't deny it's value.. So this isn't about "what I like", becosue there's many things I DON'T like or hate, but which HAVE a lot of worth in themselves which I cannot deny.
Some just don't.
So you are right..music IS OBJECTIVE :nod:
-
Totally loved that latin-sounding number during the taxicab scene in the beginning :)
Yeah, which I just discovered is the one damn track omitted from the soundtrack. :doubt:
-
Since when did War & Peace have value? While my professors would probably want me burned at the stake for heresy, being an English major, the value of a literary work is totally subjective. (Or perhaps not, many of them seem to hold this view themselves.) War & Peace annoys me; Hemmingway annoys me; most great literary works annoy me. They are excellent writing from a technical standpoint, grammar, spelling, and soforth. But the things I tend to lump under the catchall term "storytelling" mostly aren't worth a damn. It baffles me deeply that I can generally find a more compelling story by about five minutes of random clicking on fanfiction.net.
Music cannot be objective, it must be subjective by the same token. Complexity cannot overcome poor execution; the best singer cannot save the worst lyrics, the worst singer cannot be saved by the best lyrics. As what constitutes best and worst in these situations is not something that can be assigned a concrete value, the question is subjective.
Unknown misspoke, perhaps. However you compounded the error to a ridiculous degree, Trash.
-
Did I say objective? I meant subjective. I can't ever seem to type without making a snafu somewhere :( Looks like Trash took it and ran with it though :doubt:
-
Music cannot be objective, it must be subjective by the same token. Complexity cannot overcome poor execution; the best singer cannot save the worst lyrics, the worst singer cannot be saved by the best lyrics. As what constitutes best and worst in these situations is not something that can be assigned a concrete value, the question is subjective.
But you cna give it an approximate value. No, it's not nearly subjective as you think. Sure, since everyone has OPPINIONS about it it appears subjective, but people have oppinions about pretty much everything. Sume things jsut are..no matter how much we have it or adore it, it's inital value remains the same..maby it does not appear so to us....
-
So what makes your opinion more valid than everyone else's?
-
My oppinion is something completely different.
There are songs I personally hate, but that I would still HAVE to rate high, simply becosue they deserve to...
I'm trying to base my rating on as objective and scientific principles as possible.
-
The logic of your argument reminds me why you got your current personal title.
-
There are songs I personally hate, but that I would still HAVE to rate high, simply becosue they deserve to...
But why do they deserve it? Because of your subjective rating about their worth.
-
I mean wiggers. I don't like wiggers. The kids/adults/people who take the rap seriously and want to BE what it describes. You know the types of people I'm talking about.
But that's a good thing! Think about it: 50 years ago, African-Americans were widely thought of as second-class citizens. Nowadays, most white teenagers want to be African-American! If that ain't progress, I don't know what is.
Yes watching Eminem gives me warm fuzzies.
-
bunch of white boys all up in this thread
:rolleyes:
-
The logic of your argument reminds me why you got your current personal title.
Insults will get you nowhere...I'm immune to them..
But why do they deserve it? Because of your subjective rating about their worth.
When's the last time you analyzed a song? And is it subjective? How do you know?
-
Insults will get you nowhere...I'm immune to them..
That and logic.
When's the last time you analyzed a song? And is it subjective? How do you know?
Mind telling us what these oh so holy and correct analyzing of yours are? What are your categories, ratings, etc etc? And why they all come to the conclusion that all rap sucks?
-
Sure, music can be analyzed. Just like we can analyze a person by weighing the ingredients.. :blah:
-
When's the last time you analyzed a song? And is it subjective? How do you know?
:rolleyes:
Oh now that is just ridiculous. When you actually ask a proper question I'll bother to answer it.
But while you persist in claiming that opinions aren't subjective despite the fact that that is implicit in the meaning of the words opinion and subjective then you're simply not worth the effort.
-
TrashMan's just jealous because rap is more popular than metal. :D
-
Let's jsut get one thing straight....If I understodo this right, you firmly belive that music (each genre and as a whole) has no worth of it's own, but it's only us humans that give it worth.
Thus, if no humans existed to hear music, it wouldn't be worth jack s***..
Or does music eahc has it's own value, regardless of our own views of it. Now if it has such a value, you also firmly belive that no one can guess or come to that same value?
Oh well, I won't bother anymore then.
-
I have no idea what you guys are talking about.
-
I have no idea what you guys are talking about.
If that question was answered, HLP would die.
-
bunch of white boys all up in this thread
:rolleyes:
AWWW HEYLL NAWW!!!! :mad:
(mo'fukah)
:pimp::yes:
-
Let's jsut get one thing straight....If I understodo this right, you firmly belive that music (each genre and as a whole) has no worth of it's own, but it's only us humans that give it worth.
Thus, if no humans existed to hear music, it wouldn't be worth jack s***..
All art is subjective. How can it possibly have a value that is based on anything other that whether someone admires it in some way?
When you can have a computer say a piece of art is good or not using a definable algorithm then you can try telling me that it has an objective value.
-
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1143/1039956902_70323ae785.jpg?v=0)
-
Kinda looks like the 'Victims of Agincourt' yearly get-together.....
'They broke my 'ands they did sah, made sure I wouldn't be firing me bows at 'em anymore. Cut my mates fingers right orf!'
-
[horrid french accent] Silly English Longbowmen, feche la pruning shears [/horrid french accent]
-
All art is subjective. How can it possibly have a value that is based on anything other that whether someone admires it in some way?
When you can have a computer say a piece of art is good or not using a definable algorithm then you can try telling me that it has an objective value.
What about engineering?
-
What about it?
-
Thus, if no humans existed to hear music, it wouldn't be worth jack s***..
That's like saying if a tree fell in the woods and nobody was around to hear it, would it make a sound? If no humans existed to hear music, there wouldn't be any music. Music is created by humans!
-
We're talking hypothesis here.
Let's just assume music exist without humans....My question it - does it have worth even if you (or no human) are not there to hear it?
-
The big difference between this and games like Grand Theft Auto is that people actually do copy lots of things from rap. The proof? Just look around the freshman dorm in a mediocre university or your typical high school.
-
We're talking hypothesis here.
Let's just assume music exist without humans....My question it - does it have worth even if you (or no human) are not there to hear it?
Technically, practically any sound can be considered music just as any object can be considered art. Both terms are intrinsically human concepts, based upon the value a human being imbues upon the sound or object. Without anyone to imbue meaning upon a given sound, it remains just that; sound.
-
Let's just assume music exist without humans....My question it - does it have worth even if you (or no human) are not there to hear it?
How would you assign a worth to a piece of music no one will ever hear? Seriously? You keep dodging the issue and asking questions back. You're the one who is claiming that music has some intrinsic worth, separate from the opinions of the listener. I've never heard anyone claim anything like that before.
The onus is on you to prove that your theory is correct.
So I ask again. How do you quantify the value of a piece of music that no one will ever hear?
-
Does it?
That's a totaly human-centered way of thinking...the whole universe revoles around us...Yeah, right :rolleyes:
Do we assign to a "item" something it doesn't have or do we simply recognize (to some extent) something is allready poseses?
EDIT: I asked does it have a value (regardless of what it is, even if a unknown variable) not what it is. Obviously you cannot tell without hearing.
-
Trash, you're talking but you're not actually saying anything. You just keep asking questions back and basically babbling. Answer these questions: How do you assign worth to something that no one will hear? And how does this scale of worth qualify as objective?
-
EDIT: Replying to Trashman, not UT
The thing is that music is not an item but a concept, and a rather abstract one. Furthermore it's a human-defined concept, so what we define as music or not is up to us.
Same goes for 'value', it's a concept defined by humans, and even worse, every person subjectively defines for themself what they declare as value/values.
-
Does it?
That's a totaly human-centered way of thinking...the whole universe revoles around us...Yeah, right :rolleyes:
Do we assign to a "item" something it doesn't have or do we simply recognize (to some extent) something is allready poseses?
EDIT: I asked does it have a value (regardless of what it is, even if a unknown variable) not what it is. Obviously you cannot tell without hearing.
And I've told you several times that art is completely subjective and has no objective value. You can say objectively that a piece of music is loud by measuring the decibel level. You can say it's fast by measuring the BPM. What intrinsic yardstick are you going to tell me you can use to say a piece of music is beautiful?
If you are correct that there is a value you can send a computer probe to measure it and have it report back whether the music has value or not without a human ear every listening to it.
Your claims that this is a humanocentric view are simply a bull**** attempt to deflect people away from noticing that you still haven't managed to answer the question I have now asked you a multitude of times. Having trouble coming up with an objective way to measure the value of a piece of music? Hardly surprising cause there isn't one. :D
Trash, you're talking but you're not actually saying anything. You just keep asking questions back and basically babbling.
Of course he is. He's backed himself into a corner trying to defend a nonsensical theory and his only recourse is to babble and hope no one spots that he has as yet been unable to defend his theory that music has an objective value with even the smallest shred of proof.
-
Trash, you're talking but you're not actually saying anything. You just keep asking questions back and basically babbling. Answer these questions: How do you assign worth to something that no one will hear? And how does this scale of worth qualify as objective?
I'm saying more than you apparently... You're missing the point, but it doesn't really matter.
Let's just say I belive all things have some intrinsic value to it - wether you actually hit that value on the head is another matter.
And as I said, there are things in music I belive are quantifiable with a good degree of accuracy - of course, they cannot be mesured without anyone to hear it, but those values are still there regardless.
Is my scale of worth objective? I hope so.. of course, there is no way to prove it or know for sure :blah:
And I've told you several times that art is completely subjective and has no objective value. You can say objectively that a piece of music is loud by measuring the decibel level. You can say it's fast by measuring the BPM. What intrinsic yardstick are you going to tell me you can use to say a piece of music is beautiful?
And I don't give a friggin damn what you think.. You can't prove art is subjective any more than you can prove or disprove things like universal morality. IT stircly a matter of belief.
You ask for algorythms...there are none....just liek there arn't algorithms for a lot of stuff that are common sense..
Let's jsut all agree that we disagree and leave it at that, shall we?
-
Ah, argumentum ad ignorantiam, the old fallback. :D
If you can't supply an algorithm, give me a clue. Tell me what you would be measuring? :D
-
And I don't give a friggin damn what you think.. You can't prove art is subjective any more than you can prove or disprove things like universal morality. IT stircly a matter of belief.
You ask for algorythms...there are none....just liek there arn't algorithms for a lot of stuff that are common sense..
Let's jsut all agree that we disagree and leave it at that, shall we?
:lol:
Now that IS funny!
Of course, that's only my opinion which is purely subjective! :nervous:
:drevil:
-
Trash, I'm gonna be honest with you...I can't read that post. It's completely unintelligible. :p
-
Trash, I'm gonna be honest with you...I can't read that post.
Seconded.
-
Maby I'm explaining it the wrong way ..It can't be the language barrier, as my english is excellent ;7
erm..let's try it this way.... What consitutes art? A TRUE work of arn't can't really be something anyone can make in 5 minutes, now can it? Sure, some so-called artists take a load off in a bath tub and present that as art, but you can hardly call it that!
And yeah, I know some people will thinks it's art, but that proves nothing. No matter how redicolus a idea you can think of I can guarantee you'll find someone somewhere on this planet that will like it. Figures, there's 6 billions of us and at least half are idiots.
Art should be something that requires time, great skill and effort to make..something very few can make - like the statue of David, the Mona Lisa..or Mozarts or Beethowens simphonies..Those are not things that can be emulated by every regular Joe on the street.
That's why I consider rap inferior - everyone can do it. Now things like classical music not only require great skill, and effort to compose, they also require great skill and effort to preform.
And, IIRC it's been proven that classical music has benefical influence on an infants development, while rap has a negative one.
There you got - two mesurable things. Others are not nearly as easy to quantifyand are more abstract, but whatever...
-
Maby I'm explaining it the wrong way ..It can't be the language barrier, as my english is excellent ;7
erm..let's try it this way.... What consitutes art? A TRUE work of arn't can't really be something anyone can make in 5 minutes, now can it? Sure, some so-called artists take a load off in a bath tub and present that as art, but you can hardly call it that!
And yeah, I know some people will thinks it's art, but that proves nothing. No matter how redicolus a idea you can think of I can guarantee you'll find someone somewhere on this planet that will like it. Figures, there's 6 billions of us and at least half are idiots.
Art should be something that requires time, great skill and effort to make..something very few can make - like the statue of David, the Mona Lisa..or Mozarts or Beethowens simphonies..Those are not things that can be emulated by every regular Joe on the street.
That's why I consider rap inferior - everyone can do it. Now things like classical music not only require great skill, and effort to compose, they also require great skill and effort to preform.
And, IIRC it's been proven that classical music has benefical influence on an infants development, while rap has a negative one.
There you got - two mesurable things. Others are not nearly as easy to quantifyand are more abstract, but whatever...
Then you never saw last years X-Factor on ITV1.!
-
Anyone can do it badly != anyone can do it well. :D
Anyone can play the piano. That doesn't mean we can all actually make a melody that other people are interested in listening to.
Who says that a rapper who can rap well isn't displaying skill? Who says it doesn't take time? Who says it doesn't take effort? Using that yardstick if a rapper spends months working on a song and few people can sing it well then it has intrinsic value simply because of that?
Again this is a subjective measurement. You're deciding which effort was worth it. You're deciding what takes skill and what doesn't.
And, IIRC it's been proven that classical music has benefical influence on an infants development
That study was proven to be bogus actually. In fact they found that many such products actually retarded the child's language development skills.
-
And, IIRC it's been proven that classical music has benefical influence on an infants development
That study was proven to be bogus actually. In fact they found that many such products actually retarded the child's language development skills.
I know that the scientists who clamed that listening at classical music is good for IQ were bogus. I could never imagine that classical music has bad effects on children. Are you sure? As far as I know, only watching TV makes children a bit retarded!
Art should be something that requires time, great skill and effort to make..something very few can make - like the statue of David, the Mona Lisa..or Mozarts or Beethowens simphonies..Those are not things that can be emulated by every regular Joe on the street.
This is damn true(the statue of David is far from being perfect, but there's a valuable reason). Modern genres of music succeed just because they don't require skills. Mozart, for example, had particular ears which were useful. He also was a genius(he composed an awesome music soundtrack at the age of five!).
You're all going a bit OT...that video accused the skills of Rappers, but it also accused how Rappers influence teenagers. It is a fact that they don't go well at school and/or disrespect their parents just because of Rap.
-
How are you going to prove that rap causes them to disobey their parents when it could simply be the other way round? That disrespectful children are more likely to be the kind who listen to rap.
You quoting cause and effect as if it's a proven fact when it's nothing of the sort.
Again I ask you to prove your case in a way that doesn't prove Jack Thompson is also right. Not to mention all those people who want to ban horror movies and porn "For the children!"
I know that the scientists who clamed that listening at classical music is good for IQ were bogus. I could never imagine that classical music has bad effects on children. Are you sure? As far as I know, only watching TV makes children a bit retarded!
Basically classical music (and only certain kinds of classical!) gives the listener a short term boost to concentration. Studies found a similar effect from reading Steven King BTW.
The retardation occurs because the parents assume that this is a long term effect and plonk the kid down to listen to Baby Mozart instead of interacting with them themselves.
-
Like I said, we agreee that we disagree...
I know more than enpough ppl who agree with me that music has an intrincis value, so I'm not alone in this..
Humbug..I got's better ways to spend my time that discussing this :doubt:
-
How are you going to prove that rap causes them to disobey their parents when it could simply be the other way round? That disrespectful children are more likely to be the kind who listen to rap.
You quoting cause and effect as if it's a proven fact when it's nothing of the sort.
Again I ask you to prove your case in a way that doesn't prove Jack Thompson is also right. Not to mention all those people who want to ban horror movies and porn "For the children!"
Maybe because I know...well, I knew...boys and girls who love rap and decided to ignore them for the time being just because they behave like monkeys? It is a fact that some(some!)rap lovers are exaggerately influenced by the songs they listen at. Keep in mind that I said "some", not "all".
Basically classical music (and only certain kinds of classical!) gives the listener a short term boost to concentration. Studies found a similar effect from reading Steven King BTW.
The retardation occurs because the parents assume that this is a long term effect and plonk the kid down to listen to Baby Mozart instead of interacting with them themselves.
That's more a damage caused by the lack of interaction, not actually a damage caused by the music itself. There's a difference!
Humbug..I got's better ways to spend my time that discussing this :doubt:
:yes:
-
Maybe because I know...well, I knew...boys and girls who love rap and decided to ignore them for the time being just because they behave like monkeys? It is a fact that some(some!)rap lovers are exaggerately influenced by the songs they listen at. Keep in mind that I said "some", not "all".
Yes but is it just rap that would influence them? If there was no rap music wouldn't then just find some other socially unacceptable fad to join with and use that as their excuse for acting poor.
You want to stop playing computer games because two boys in America who played Quake a lot shot up a school? Cause your argument against rap music can be directly transposed to the Columbine shooting and video games. Your arguments against rap music are not hugely dissimilar to those that Jack Thompson would use against violence in video games.
Yet because you like video games I'm sure you'll make the same argument I'm making here as to why he's wrong.
So what is the difference? And don't give me some wishy washy nonsense about it being a proven effect. It's not.
That's more a damage caused by the lack of interaction, not actually a damage caused by the music itself. There's a difference!
I never said the music was to blame. But the lack of interaction is caused by the erroneous assumption that the music will do good on its own.
Humbug..I got's better ways to spend my time that discussing this :doubt:
Who do you think you are kidding?
The "I'm right and here's why but it's not worth discussing the matter" trick is one of the oldest ones in debating. And as for your claim that you know lots of people who believe you're right, didn't you assert earlier that half the population of the world were idiots? :p
-
Your half ;7
EDIT - and no, no tricks. I realyl don't have the energy to continue this, and I got a s***load of work to do - about a dozen mission, 3-4 models + that Demon, then music to cut and mix, mission testing and balancing...and thats for my campaign alone.. add a few other projects I'km helping out, my exam and 2 seminars I got to finish pretty soon and you get a nice mambo jumbo.
Technicly, I COULD fiund time, I allways manage to when I really want to do something...but this discussion ain't worth it
-
And I've told you several times that art is completely subjective and has no objective value.
I hate to ask the same question twice, but I want an answer. What are your views on engineering?
-
I don't see what your question even is.
-
He's talking about the, often confused, difference between an art and a craft I think.
Personally I believe there's a third option, for example, Computer Programming is a craft, it requires technical knowledge and practice, however, there are also reasons to call it an art, Architects sit in this strange 'Crart' category as well, there's a Rigid 'under-basis' to anything they make which has to be stable and durable (much like a Programmer) but beyond those basic rules, there is a lot of artistic freedom.
Sound Engineers are Crartists as well, in a way, they have to keep within certain 'rules', but there's a lot of flexibility in those rules, and it takes an artist, as well as a craftsman to do sound production well.
-
Ah. That's what I thought he was on about but he threw me by saying engineering rather than architecture. Again it's easy to answer. Whether a building fulfils it's purpose is something you can measure objectively. Whether it looks good while doing it, that's a subjective matter.
Seems pretty obvious to me.
-
Ah. That's what I thought he was on about but he threw me by saying engineering rather than architecture. Again it's easy to answer. Whether a building fulfils it's purpose is something you can measure objectively. Whether it looks good while doing it, that's a subjective matter.
Seems pretty obvious to me.
Logical gap opens, not that it will help trash much; did the song fulfill it's purpose?
-
When you compare music of the same genre (Or sub-genre for that matter) using the target audience, the quality of the music becomes objective. Take, for instance, Body Movin' by The Beastie Boys. When it was released on radio, it did not do well. The song was said to be lacking in element and flow. Then Fatboy Slim came along and gave it a remix. The song suddenly was on the top of the charts in hip-hop, dance, and rock stations and stayed there for quite a while. The remixed version was outright better, and not even the Beastie Boys defended the original (they in fact added the Fatboy Slim remix to one of their favorites albums). Country music fans couldn't give two ****s about the genre, so their views on it are subjective.
Oh, and I'm no fan of country music or rap, but I can still objectively judge the quality of the song by following the basis of music theory and composure. I being a big fan of hip hop, but no so big a fan of metallic punk rock, I still know How I Could Kill A Man was performed much better by Rage Against the Machine than by Cypress Hill. Rage gave the song lots more consistency and uniformity. Subjective? I think not.
-
Logical gap opens, not that it will help trash much; did the song fulfill it's purpose?
Art's purpose is subjective though. :p
Oh, and I'm no fan of country music or rap, but I can still objectively judge the quality of the song by following the basis of music theory and composure. I being a big fan of hip hop, but no so big a fan of metallic punk rock, I still know How I Could Kill A Man was performed much better by Rage Against the Machine than by Cypress Hill. Rage gave the song lots more consistency and uniformity. Subjective? I think not.
So what do you say to someone who prefers the Cypress Hill version? That they're wrong?
-
now that's not entierly true, the song did make the artists and publisher quite a bit of money, no? that was why it was produced, no? so we do have a way of quantifying how well a song "fulfilled it's purpose". at least with some of them.
-
It's a pretty sad lookout for art if we quantify its intrinsic value by how much money it made.
I will concede the point that if you want to measure art objectively you can use that as a measure though. But in that case rap has a lot of intrinsic value since it sells well and anything by Britney Spears has greater value than most of the music you probably like.
I don't think it was the measure myself and Trashman were debating about though. We were talking about an objective value for art as art. You're talking about an intrinsic value for art as a cash cow.
-
Logical gap opens, not that it will help trash much; did the song fulfill it's purpose?
Art's purpose is subjective though. :p
That depends. Obviously the creator's idea of the purpose has some more validity then some random person's.
-
...art as a cash cow.
well, we are talking about rap/hiphop here.
oh, pardon me hiphop and r&b 'flava'
****ing anti-thought BS... :doubt:
-
That depends. Obviously the creator's idea of the purpose has some more validity then some random person's.
Yes the creator can state his purpose with more validity than some random person but why did he choose that purpose?
That's what I mean about the purpose of art being subjective. When an architect creates a bridge we can also say that the purpose was to make sure people could cross a river and measure how well it does that objectively but when it comes to the design of the bridge even if the architect tells you flat out that he wanted to make the bridge look like the wings of a dove you still don't know why he did that, and deep down, he probably doesn't know either.
With all art the reason why you did A rather than B is usually just a matter of aesthetics and that is always a subjective choice. So even if you measure how much said bridge looks like a dove you still haven't done anything to assign an objective value to how beautiful the bridge actually is, because whether bridges that look like doves wings are beautiful or not is a completely subjective matter.
...art as a cash cow.
well, we are talking about rap/hiphop here.
oh, pardon me hiphop and r&b 'flava'
****ing anti-thought BS... :doubt:
Well if you don't like rap that's your choice but throughout time much art has been made because a patron has flung a wad of cash at an artist and told him to make something they liked. Whether the song was written mainly to make money or not has little bearing on it's value as art. The two things are separate.
Yes songs that are made in a formulaic manner just to make money tend to be crap but sometimes you can still find a few good ones amongst the dross.
-
there has also been an unimaginable volume of horrible crap that was forgotten about.
-
Fair enough but the solution is not to get rid of rap any more than destroying Hollywood is the solution to the fact that it constantly puts out boring formulaic movies.
-
oh, I never said that was the solution, I just said the genre is a virtually unredeemable mire of some of the most uninspired auditory waist ever to be unleashed upon an unsuspecting universe, that it promotes and sustains a culture of style over substance and mindless sensationalist stupidity, which could one day bring about the fall of man kind. I never said it should be banned, just I don't like it, and would be pleased to see it fade, silently, into history due to people finally recognizing the inherent evil[1] of it along with some of America's less horrific creations such as lynching and thermonuclear warfare and the income tax.[2]
[1] I consider the promotion of stupidity to be evil
[2] the preceding paragraph may have contained some usage of hyperbole
-
I look at most rap in sort of a darwinian light; most of the people who listen to the will probably remove themselves from the gene pool, so why should I complain?
-
So what do you say to someone who prefers the Cypress Hill version? That they're wrong?
No, you're misinterpreting what I said. The preference is a subjective matter, the mechanical composure is not. I know plenty of people who prefer the Cypress Hill version, but who would not argue against Rage performing and composing it better. It just doesn't happen to be their style of music, so they don't like that version as much... But then again, I prefer Rage, so maybe my ideas are a little bit biased :p.
A lot of people pass of ****ty art as abstract, but most people know after looking at it/listening to it, it's just not well done. To create art, it requires both the mental ability to form creative ideas, as well as the trained ability to execute said ideas. To have one without the other would not make good art. Without the ability to create ideas, but a good ability to draw or sing, you end up with something that looks/sounds good but doesn't mean anything. Without the ability to draw or sing effectively, but with the ability to construct rich ideas, you end up with something that has meaning but looks/sounds like ****. To have either one skill a deficit would likely create a lower quality of art. It is in this where art is objective.
-
From a bathing tub
I throw water into the lake -
slight muddiness appears.
- Hekigodo Kawahigashi
Some people may find an "idea" there, some may not. Who is right, objectively?
Personally, I'm not too eager to claim something not being art. But I can tell what is, in my opinion, after experiencing it.
-
The point is that Rap is modern. People will take it in consideration...in the future....after the death of all Rappers. :lol:
What about Picasso? His art was considered thrash. Everything changed after Pablo's death. )
-
Picassos early art was good.. that impressionims (or watever) IS trash. :ick:
-
That's not impressionism...and that's not trash. It's just...modern.
I mean, under a certain point of view...Michelangelo, Raffaello, Giotto, Masaccio and Bosch rule. But Picasso kicks asses.
-
Picasso kicks as much ass as all the modern "art" - like sculptures that look like someone just flung clay around, disgusting "performaces", pictures that look like a baby played with colors, bathtubs full of barbie heads or crap (literary) and other such ....stupidities. :ick:
Let's face it, the modern art world lost it's way... everything good has allready been done, and in their desparate search for something new tehy turn everything into art :hopping:
Makes me wish all those art critics were gathered in one big room.....
*GUNNERY CONTROL, OPEN FIRE!* :beamz: :snipe:
-
But there still is something good in modern art. Art has always been connected to what the human species wanted do and/or wanted to be.
In Ranaissance, there was an high consideration of the man. "The man who, all by himself, succeeds". Michelangelo's David is the reflection of that philosophy.
The Romans always considered the Architecture a superior art because they liked immense structures. Everything was intended to "Celebrate the glory of Rome". In their period, statues were important...but as much as important as mausoleums and theatres.
The structure of human buildings changed in the past centuries. The humans changed as well. The modern art represents our period. Our achievements and our failures. A mix of good and evil.
-
Modern art represents the crappines of modern life? :wtf:
Sound true :D
-
Yep. That's what I'm saying.