Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
The more music I listen to, the pickier I become and harder it is to be impressed. More and more music just gets filed under MOR these days. On the flip, I feel like I have a better grasp on what it is I appreciate, what greatness really is, and when something really stands out.
and shift based on how much you hear. Like when you go back to something you once considered great only to realize its now mediocre. idk.
Try that out with Merzbow and let me know how it goes.
I wonder this all the time. Haven't heard any of the albums you mentioned in there.
but I just found the whole posts very hard to digest considering it was about The Resistance by Muse.
The Resistance is terrible
but my ipod recently died and listening to the quite horrific stuff that's on the radio at work has really brought home to me how shit a lot of music out there really is.
i can't even process that notion.
continued exposure to greatness that has given you a better frame of reference for recognizing shite.
imagine going around saying that to people. i'd be popular.
This idea of greatness evolves with the more music we listen to.
however we only have so much time.....so do you spend your life listening to shit or do you work out pretty quickley what you like
Super Trouper and the Visitors as well as the lows of Ring Ring and Waterloo?
But I didnt so much when I was younger. Look, Im not gonna actively listen to something I know sucks for long periods of time. I listen to more songs in a day than I care to talk about, scouring blogs and tumblrs and blah blah, but songs that might have struck me as good like 3-4 years ago dont even register on my radar anymore. The more I listen to, the quicker I can recognize when something is special.
Some stuff I considered great years ago is now mediocre to me, experience and time and learning new things about music/instrumentation/skill/history changes perspective.
more perspective and wider reading/listening is great in everything
the suggestion is i must listen to more shit......so no.
but dont you come across it (hear it) frequently?
is out of my control. if i dont like it, i switch it off. bit of a nazi
exposing oneself to 'shit' ...i dont think i agree with this but this assertion is definatley there.
i avoid the radio, rightly or wrongly precisely because i'm not in control....in my arrogance ..i *know* what is good...see?
....i suspect this debate would be better served face to face in the pub, or else i think its going to become rather circular.
this thread is corrupt!
so now i can really see that this whole thread is utterly flawed. make mine a pint of scotch and then we'll get started...
but the others could be described as their sell out albums.....no?
cos no one sells anymore.
Abbey Road isn't the Beatles' most boring album.
Regardless of your stance on these albums, you're kind of answering the question.
the decision came after.....so hmmmmmmmmm maybe
Not necessarily the second. Old critics can get a little crusty and tunnel-visioned. Agree with what you're saying at the base level though.
I agree with your post though, minus the personal jab of course.
What rap music do you not feel that way about?
I like you cos your passionate about music and have entertaining posts with actual (sometimes relate-able) human elements attached. I dont care what music people like or dislike around here, music preference maketh not the man.
maybe they adopt the style/attitude and take it too far, its all a bit sheepish. I guess Im just too all over the place taste-wise to ever buy into the cult aspect of genres.
The only music board threads I ever make are "list albums where this happens" type threads as opposed to questions like this.
In summary, what the utter fuck are you talking about you lunatic?
that you've started inventing your own version of my personality to dislike, apropos of nothing. I'm also not that convinced you know very much about my music taste.
Also, you've got to try and tone down this grudge-holding. One would really hope that one of the boards older members would be one of the LEAST childish, but there you go.
(it is a perfectly interesting question but I've never asked a question like this in my time here, I'm usually too busy making pointless lists in my head to think about stuff like this). And do you really have to let personal grudges get in the way of every thread ever, no matter if the other person is involved or not? A bit like when you started accusing every user on the board in various threads of being TheDailyBumbler because he'd said some mean things to you.
Now grow up, sit down and be quiet and let people discuss the fucking question you self-obsessed loon.
you've finally cracked haven't you.
I think determining mediocrity v. greatness is almost entirely based on expectations. I know a ton of people who have had VERY extended exposure to mediocre punk and metal and it hasn't helped their frame of reference for recognizing greatness one iota. I think if you expect a certain aesthetic then that expectation takes precedence over determining whether or not what you're listening to is really any good. At the end of the day, if you try to stick to one genre or aesthetic and your interests aren't that varied, you're going to hit the bottom of the barrel, because as I've seen said on here a thousand times, genres are 85% shit. Genres are a contract between the audience and the performer, based on a set of expectations. When those expectations are fulfilled in a rote, stagnant manner, the result can be satisfying for someone who has no criterion other than that expectation, even if it is a stale piece of shit (which is more than likely). I think a more healthy attitude to art is to take things as you find them and to try and judge works on their own terms, using genre simply as a framework to help keep things organized. Perhaps then it's easier to separate the wheat from the chaff.
I'm fully fluent in gibberish.
Ive got friends/coworkers that are stuck in the same ol they were stuck in 15 years ago, no deviation.
Yah judging 'art' on its own terms is the ideal, but not always possible/easy. Theres just so many factors, but its a healthy way to approach things for sure.
think its probably true of most right?
I know people who have had extended exposure to mediocrity who would not recognize the greatness of Nicki Minaj's 'Super Bass' or Rihanna's 'What's My Name.' Mediocrity failed them big time.
POD JUST GOOP
GOD JOUST POP
GOOD JOT PUPS
very good piece, but then I love everything by Kermode
and I did start of listening to mediocre bands. I started off on Muse, thinking they were Gods. But i'd listen to something like Radiohead say, and my music taste would slowly not only shifting, but i'd also begin to appreciate different things, so become more "sophisticated" in choosing my music. I used to get sent a lot of post-rock by a friend, and without knowing anything about any of the bands, I managed to filter out the shit stuff, and was left with the critic's choices like mogwai, just by my own ear.
I'd say now i'm one of those people effected by reviews too much. I know i shouldn't, and it's indie-listening points if you avoid reviews before listening, but it's how i work. In a way it helps- "The shape of punk to come" and "Jane Doe", now 2 of my favourite albums, would have been completely brushed away by a younger me for being too heavy (system of a down was my heavy stuff), but because they got such great reviews, i made myself listen to them to understand what was so amazing about them, and again picked up new listening "skills" for lack of a better word.
/17 year old hipster post
you're me 5 years ago! (I'm 22)
As long as i'm not on the streets i'm happy.
@Alpha, you're probably right, but in some genres (like post-rock) there is a lot of drivel you have to sort your way through. And as for Muse, I was about the only person on the screen during their Leeds set looking bored, the music excites me that much (even with nostalgia factor)
struggling but still enjoying to get a band together.
Oh, also you discover lots of new music.
where he started off listening to more music than me and I'd be listening to some stuff that I now think is absolute shite, now he is too busy to listen to too much, whereas I'm listening to an abominable amount, and now we seem to have reversed tolerance for shit, he gets angry with me for how willing I am to call stuff out for not being good enough heh.
Some bands have gone both ways actually though, growing up listened to tons of REM and then kind of left them for a while, they were too familiar in a way, then came back to them a few years ago now and remembered why I liked them in the first place.
you'd think that when one listens to less music you'd be more picky with it, but think it's actually the other way round
and tolerance levels. But generally speaking, this is probably true #projecting101
Sometimes I wonder if I'm developing Stockholm Syndrome when I start to think that I might be an actual fan of stuff by The Pierces, Sugababes, Gabriella Cilmi or Nelly Furtado, rather than merely tolerating them. Then I realise that I've always had plenty of time for a good pop tune.
On the other hand, Maroon 5, The Feeling, and Scouting for Girls have driven me close to the edge of my tolerance levels. Dunno whether that means I end up being grateful for the respite of anything half decent, or if I'm pushed to bypass stuff that I might end up liking in order to seek out a hit of instant goodness. Hopefully the latter, probably the former.
Basically my only highlights were Single Ladies (put a ring on it) and Poker Face. HIGHLIGHTS
i would think that extended exposure to mediocrity would give you a distorted view of what greatness really is, if indeed either entities are objectively quantifiable anyways.
But a lot of my friends say that I listen to a lot of rubbish, whereas the way I see it is that I listen to a lot more music in general, so I inevitably listen to more rubbish than them. Having said that, the stuff they describe as rubbish is stuff like Rolo Tomassi or Oneohtrix Point Never. It's not exactly easy listening, but it's brilliant. But they're just like, "No, you love shit."
extended exposure to things that we don't appreciate gives us a better frame of reference for recognizing what we appreciate. musically and otherwise
at work, i have to listen and know a reasonable amount about music that isn't really my bag which makes it all the better to put on my headphones and listen to my own thing when i get the chance. but mediocrity is somewhat relative to personal taste
and I'd wager the correct answer is yes.
But up against a lot of you guys, I probably listen to a fairly narrow selection of music (mainly rock and indie and their offshoots like post-rock and alt-country etc; although I appreciate the greatness in some classical, jazz, blues & pop etc.)
My tuppence worth on Muse: I quietly slipped away from them following the Absolution album but after seeing them on the Reading footage I have a new-found appreciation for just how technically good and ambitious they are. There are many hugely popular and successful bands out there in their genre who will never get close to what Muse can do - Foo Fighters, My Chemical Romance (whatever they do musically, he's no match for Bellamy vocally.), 30 Seconds To Mars etc etc. I'd say Muse are up there pretty close to 'greatness'.
Esp. with music- it's less of an event than going to the cinema for me- hence I am prepared sometimes to listen to music i'm not entirely sure is good yet or not when i'm doing other stuff. I haaate paying to see mediocre cinema, it feels like an abuse of the artform more.
However, as a caveat to that- I have continually for the past couple of years been more picky about music as it changes from just soundtracking nights out/ enjoying catchy songs, to actually engaging with music as more of an artistic object. i think it's in the DNA of music that we are naturally attuned to the form of it and as such it can sometimes seem to be more part of the everyday than cinema/other art is; even though I've gradually realised that's not what makes up the most poignant and memorable music I love.
A lot of that has to do with us all being continually uh... drowned in sound. Music is pretty much everywhere all the time, you cant really avoid it in public. Its that desire to engage with it beyond this which I believe is where greatness is realized (which greatness we all agree is relative).
I don't think the question makes much sense. A great exposure of mediocrity probably only gives you a compass of greatness that is relevant inside that spectrum of the mediocre, but for many mediocre is all the range.
I would like to quote Mark Kermode for you. His new book deals with cinema, but changing what he says to apply to music fits this question quite well I think:
"Every time I complain that [an album] is [musically dumb, crap] or artistically barren, I get a torrent of emails from alleged mainstream-[music] lovers complaining that I (as a snotty critic) am applying highbrow criteria that cannot and should not be applied to good old undemanding [insert-music-genre] entertainment. I am not alone in this; every critic worth their salt has been lectured about their distance from the demands of "popular music", or has been told that their views are somehow elitist and out of touch. This has become a shrieking refrane of 21st-century [music] (anti) culture - the idea that critics are just too clever for their own good, have [heard] too many [albums] to know what the average punter wants, and are therefore solely unqualified to pass judgement on the fodder that "real" music listeners demands from their albums.
This is baloney - and worse, it is pernicious baloney peddled by people who are only interested in money and don't give a damn about [music]. [...] The problem is that we've all learned to tolerate a level of overpaid, institutionalised corporate dreadfulness that no one actually likes but meekly accepts because we all been told that [music] has to be stupid to survive."
The point I take from this when applied to music - and I do think it does apply - is that mediocrity does not give people a greater appreciation of greatness, it fuels complacency and a lack of experimentation (in terms of listening habits).
Saying extra exposure to mediocrity makes for a greater appreciation of greatness is like saying if you mate two cats together enough times you'll eventually get a dog.
My Dad is a good example. He's familiar with a lot of great music from his youth and some of it, at times, can be similar to what I listen to. But it doesn't matter how much we both like jazz, if I show him hip-hop, he doesn't like it. It doesn't matter if it is A Tribe Called Quest with their heavy-on-jazz samples. He has become complacent with a certain structure to his songs and that is what he sees as greatness: being similar to what he knows. That's a simplified way of putting how his taste has formed and I think it is for many of us, but recognising "greatness" is relative to what you're familiar with and whether or not you are willing to look beyond that and embrace what you find.
Enjoyed that article, which was already linked to above.
--- Saying extra exposure to mediocrity makes for a greater appreciation of greatness is like saying if you mate two cats together enough times you'll eventually get a dog. ---
idk about this analogy.
--- mediocrity does not give people a greater appreciation of greatness, it fuels complacency and a lack of experimentation (in terms of listening habits). ---
Although I get this, personally it kind of has the adverse effect on me. My boss listens to the vilest of vile music; out-loud, everyday, allll day, with the crappiest speakers (another topic I'd like to discuss). So I listen to it because I cant escape it sometimes. I thrive on that feeling I get when I put my cans on and dive into something non-"complacent" and possibly "experimental." Because I am in this situation, I appreciate the good stuff more.
Music is subjective. No such thing as greatness/mediocrity. It's what you like and what you don't like and it's personal to you.
We all have our own built in filters.
Who makes the judgement if something is great or not? One person, 100,000 people, based on record sales, NME Journalists, respected Musicians?
It's a pointless thread really.
Make your own judgements on music. Your opinion is right! Expand your love of music by listening to suggested artists from people you trust.
Pretty sure this question perfectly allows for everyone's own subjective opinion on what the mediocre stuff is and what the great stuff is. Only you might have me posting dickish replies at you if you include Muse in the latter camp.
And how have I missed the point?
I'm no judge on what's great or mediocre or crap, just like everybody else on this site.
I know what I like to listen to and what I hate, but because I hate something, doesn't mean it's mediocre or bad. Conversely, if I love something, it doesn't make it great.
As I said earlier, who decides Greatness?
I will add that I rarely listen to the radio, have no idea what's in the charts as I spend most of my time listening at live gigs. 130th of the year last night (Bo Ningen at the Shacklewell Arms, London). And it was an excellent gig.
I will say it again.
PRETTY SURE THIS QUESTION PERFECTLY ALLOWS FOR EVERYONE'S OWN SUBJECTIVE OPINION ON WHAT THE MEDIOCRE STUFF IS AND WHAT THE GREAT STUFF IS.
To explain further, I'm pretty sure you have music that you love and therefore think is 'great', and music that you don't like that much, which you think is 'mediocre'. Now, you rightly may refuse to refer to these as if they were facts, which is good (although everyone does it sometimes, be honest. It's very difficult to discuss music very much without ever presenting your opinion as if it's definitive, even when you know it's not, because it's tremendously boring to just go around saying "OOOH, I DON'T REALLY LIKE THOSE MUMFORD AND SONS VERY MUCH AT ALL, BUT YOU KNOW, I CAN SEE WHY YOU'RE A FAN, EACH TO THEIR OWN. OOOOH, NO I REALLY LIKE BATTLES BUT YES I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY YOU MIGHT THINK IT'S JUST NOISE, EACH TO THEIR OWN. OOOOH I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND ALL THE FUSS AROUND THE XX, BUT HEY, THAT'S JUST ME, EACH TO THEIR OWN." I mean, 'each to their own' is obviously the right attitude to hold overall, but every now and then you will quite obviously call something 'shit'.) but let's not try and halt all discussion just because "HEY! WE ALL HAVE LIKE OUR OWN OPINIONS, MAN!" even though that's not really relevant in relation to this thread anyway.
Basically, let's pretend this thread is titled "Does extended exposure to music you think is mediocre give you a better frame of reference for recognizing music you think is great?"
I hope that's solved any problems you may be having. But if you think I'm wrong about all this, then HEY, YOU KNOW, EACH TO THEIR OWN.
The bit about Muse was just a reference to some earlier posts.
I don't have any problems Icarus.
I am more than willing to give my opinion on the quality of an artist's musical output, but I wouldn't be presumptuous to call it shit, mediocre or great. I would always qualify it with I think....
My opinion on someone else's taste is completely irrelevant, unless they happen to give my opinion any weight.
I love a good argument about music, just as much as the next person, but it's a fight you can't win. Someone may give in and agree with you, but you haven't won.
Surely we only try to seek out music we might like, by recommendation is the most common way, or by who we think may be related artists via genre or whatever way you measure music.
I try not to be a musical snob and force my taste on other people. I'll make recommendations, based on others perceived tastes tho'. I honestly try and appreciate other people's views.
My favourite artists include Tool, Soundgarden, Jane's Addiction, Nine Inch Nails, Ministry, Monster Magnet, Warrior Soul, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Led Zeppelin, Aerosmith, BRMC, Curve, The Duke Spirit, Archie Bronson Outfit, Fuck Buttons, Spotlight Kid, Crystal Head, Blindness, The Early Years, The Black Angels, Boxer Rebellion, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Exit Calm, Frightened Rabbit, Pure Reason Revolution, A Place to Bury Strangers, Evi Vine, The Joy Formidable and many others.
This list will get shot down by many and a few may agree. The thing is, I don't care. Someone else's opinion won't change my love of those artists.
I'll whole heartedly agree that the stuff that get's played on daytime radio (on the rare occasion I hear it) rarely does anything for me, the same as the stuff that is championed by the NME. So I stay away from it.
I'll try and find stuff that might reference my favourites. I'm always looking for new stuff to get excited about.
I can honestly say that I'll never say something is shit, but I will say I think it's shit. There is a difference. Maybe I'm just being pedantic. Let others make their views known.
Just out of interest, when was the last time anyone heard something genuinely new on TV, Radio or internet stream, that you'd never heard before, by recommendation or any other means, that you thought Wow, I need to check them out. I think the last time I had this was KT Tunstall on Jools Holland many years ago, doing Black Horse & The Cherry Tree.