puntiniCAZpuntini

DeRank : 14,44 • DeAge™ : 7969 days

  • Contact
  • Here since 21 october 2003
Voto:
Emanuele, I am not trying to "judge" a genre based on an objective evaluation. My argument was entirely focused on your statement "music is not subjective," which I do not agree with, while I do support an "attempt at objective evaluation according to preset criteria." Whether I am confusing things (maybe I am, huh) cannot be understood from what I wrote, as I didn't even address the argument but only provided examples. I don't even care to engage with the argument. The "clash" that occurred on this page has happened and will always happen because you are in a site that, by its nature, tends to undermine objectivity to promote subjective evaluation: reviews written by anyone, not necessarily by experts. It is logical that, being a teacher and a professional in the field, you try to pursue discussions that, although legitimate, honestly do not interest me/us and find a barren ground. I repeat, once you clarified to me that, according to you as well, "musical taste cannot be objective," I am fine with everything; that was just where I wanted to get. And this doesn't mean that you are saying nonsense; "musicology" is surely a very interesting topic, but not for me. Ajeje, your argument flows well, but I can't strip a listening from its release date; otherwise, I would have to say that Simon Price from The Heads is a thousand times better than Hendrix :D
Voto:
... I can't escape the rant... Ajeje, it never happens to me EITHER, only with the classics from the 1800s downwards. Let’s be clear, the classical compositions made TODAY, I say "it might be genius maybe, but I don't like it." because those of today have the opportunity to explore, and if they don’t, then that's their loss, but it doesn’t seem like genius behavior to me. But when we talk about the great classics, they can't be blamed for the fact that synths and electricity didn't exist, so for their time, their work was nothing short of genius. Listening to them at first impact triggers an automatic response that makes me appreciate them solely as notes and I say WOW WHAT A GENIUS, then after a while of listening, my ear finds no substance to sustain it and tells me WOW WHAT A DRAG. But I repeat, regarding modern music, it never happens to me. Here we are on the verge of an immense rant, let’s try to stay on the edges without falling into the 800 post abysses :D
Voto:
Here we are getting stuck badly in an old-fashioned rant. I'm abandoning ship, also because then Flavio changes his mind and won't let me go out with Naomi anymore; I have to seize the opportunity on the fly.
Voto:
However, you are a scoundrel, you throw the girls into the conversation to confuse me. It's not fair.
Voto:
Ajeje... yes and no :D : "Beautiful Naomi Campbell" and Flavio: "Do you want her?" and I said "not a chance!". Flavio asked "why?". "Because I don’t like her and we don’t get along." The dislike for the sound or timbre of an otherwise brilliant/beautiful composition can be compared to the dislike for the character of an otherwise beautiful woman, aka a brilliant product of nature. I'm not saying that the classic "it might be brilliant but I don’t like it," for me it’s truly brilliant, but I just don’t like it; it’s simply grating to my ear. It’s something I can’t explain because it stems solely from taste; it's not an objective flaw, just a personal aversion.
Voto:
Ah, just perfect.
Voto:
Look, I really like the album too; I've voted for it positively several times. That doesn’t change the fact that this review is full of nonsense like "Cornerstone of heavy metal," and in the comments, you find gems like "Queen iconographically more famous than the Beatles." Also, excuse me for a second, but you’ve probably read 10 reviews out of 6000; can you explain where you get your so-called "unfounded" from? Read the entire site, all of Francis’s contributions, and then you can talk.
Voto:
<<< the "brilliant but I don't like it" is one of the saddest concepts that exist. >>> But no, come on ajeje, one can perceive brilliance but not appreciate the final result. I find much classical stuff brilliant, like the example of Mozart, but since I don't like the sound produced by classical instruments, I don't like the final result. Obviously, when I happen to hear classical pieces reworked with modern sounds, I get really excited. But the fact remains that I don't like the original.
Voto:
I just saw the private messages. I have a 56k connection and can’t open multiple pages at the same time; this one has so many posts that it takes up all the bandwidth. But we can still understand each other, it just takes clear explanations and putting things into perspective. If you shoot out blunt and sharp phrases, it’s hard not to contradict yourself. I, for example, have very strong opinions about cinema, but at the same time, I obviously admit that I don’t understand the artistic sense of it, or to put it plainly: I don’t understand a thing, as I am stuck in two rigid opinions and the rest seems pointless to me.
Voto:
<<< it is obvious that musical taste cannot be objectified... >>> Ok, perfect, now you can say whatever you want. <<< but I can prove that Parker is musically superior to Eminem. >>> Well, obviously, if we are talking about MUSICAL SUPERIORITY, you are completely right. Since music is also a discipline, some points can obviously be objectified. You just have to """"be careful"""" about how you use the words subjective/objective; that's where misunderstandings arise. Everything else are just respectable opinions.