Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site masscomp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!masscomp!lip
From: lip@masscomp.UUCP (John Lipinski)
Newsgroups: net.music
Subject: Re: Music Kritics
Message-ID: <697@masscomp.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 14-May-85 09:30:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: masscomp.697
Posted: Tue May 14 09:30:53 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 15-May-85 00:40:11 EDT
References: <268@osiris.UUCP> <4148@mit-eddie.UUCP> <10517@brunix.UUCP> <231@spar.UUCP> <10579@brunix.UUCP>
Reply-To: lip@masscomp.UUCP (John Lipinski)
Distribution: net
Organization: Masscomp - Westford, MA
Lines: 55
Summary: 

In article <10579@brunix.UUCP> ry@nancy.UUCP (Rich Yampell) writes:
>
>>>Is there any absolute way to judge music, or is quality *always* a matter
>>>of opinion?  And if there are any absolute standards, what are they?
>>> -- Rich Yampell
>>
...
>>>>   "If you don't like something that *I* like, then you are narrow-minded."
>>
>>    Replace `I' with `anybody'. That's a good start. Patience helps.
>>    So does liking what you don't like. But judgement stinks.
>
>Bogus.  From this, it follows that *all* sound of any kind is good music,
>since, for any sound S, I can surely find someone somewhere who thinks S is
>masterful.  My gut feeling is that this is obviously false, though I cannot
>prove it (yet).  You clearly think that this is true, which is fine, but you
>have simply stated it as if it were fact, rather than showing why it must be
>so.  This begs the question.  The point of the discussion (I had hoped),
>would be to try and find reasons for holding either side of this opinion.

I  think that  for a  consensus to  be  reached on  the quality  of music,  a
consensus has to be reached on the sub-qualities of music.  Some like rhythm,
some like complexity, simplicity, improvisation... 

>I am looking to either justify my gut feelings, or convince myself that they
>are wrong and should be ignored.

I have the same feelings.  An argument in support of absolute music standards
can be framed like this:  person X  says that AC/DC is better than Beethoven.
(Rich, I'm sure you heard of Beethoven, right?) Person Y claims the opposite.
Now, I am pretty sure that  Beethoven would quickly understand and comprehend
AC/DC music.   He could  also duplicate  it quite  easily.  However,  I don't
think AC/DC could understand or duplicate a Beethoven symphony.  On the basis
of B can do A, but A can't do B,  one could say that B's music is of a higher
quality - shall I say.

>The real question is, *can* critics,
>or anyone else, be "right", or is it necessarily a matter of subjective
>opinion?  

I think  that question  is phrased  too simply.   I would  not use  the words
"right" or  "wrong" in  this case.   An opinion  can not  be wrong  or right.
However, it  can be  *less valid* than  another's.  However,  like everything
else, it  is *impossible* to  prove anything -  in real life  occurrences.  A
calculus equation can be  proved on paper, but it can not  when it is applied
to a real life problem.  

>Then,  to fulfill a fine arts requirement, I took a course on Beethoven.  
>Changed my life.   
> 			Rich Yampell

Whoever said UMUS was useless?

		- John Lipinski
		  {decvax,ihnp4,ittvax,allegra}!masscomp!lip}