Music Criticism

[Guest AsylumSeaker]

I don't think that there's any way to determine whether work is 'good' or 'bad' in more than subjective or statistical terms, but more to the point I don't think it's very useful to try to do so. I don't get much out of it, in any case. When I read or hear criticism which focuses on the perceived quality of the work, my eyes tend to glaze over, because I don't tend to look at things that way myself. I'm more interested in hearing insights into the work that I may have missed, and connections made between it and other things that I might not be aware of. I like criticism that does something to give depth to the work being discussed, whatever it is.

[xox]

when i thing about criticism...uffff

 

it was like million yrs ago. me having myspace loaded with ambient stuff. some djs asked a friend of mine about me cause they heard that i make noizez and shit and she played some of those tracks right from the page during some gathering at her place. the response was: >>> the music is quite interesting but unfinished; NO KICK DRUMS <<<

 

[LimpyLoo]

I don't think that there's any way to determine whether work is 'good' or 'bad' in more than subjective or statistical terms, but more to the point I don't think it's very useful to try to do so. I don't get much out of it, in any case. When I read or hear criticism which focuses on the perceived quality of the work, my eyes tend to glaze over, because I don't tend to look at things that way myself. I'm more interested in hearing insights into the work that I may have missed, and connections made between it and other things that I might not be aware of. I like criticism that does something to give depth to the work being discussed, whatever it is.

 

Criticism isn't necessarily an assessment of whether something is 'good' or 'bad'.

 

Often it just puts the work in question into some sort of context, or investigates the merits of its aim and execution thereof.

[zkom]

when i thing about criticism...uffff

 

it was like million yrs ago. me having myspace loaded with ambient stuff. some djs asked a friend of mine about me cause they heard that i make noizez and shit and she played some of those tracks right from the page during some gathering at her place. the response was: >>> the music is quite interesting but unfinished; NO KICK DRUMS <<<

 

 

Lol, years ago I had the opposite reaction when someone wrote in a comment to my track that there should never ever be a distorted kick drum in an ambient track.

[zkom]

I don't mind negative criticism in general, they're just individual opinions. I was maybe somewhat more sensitive when I was younger, but now I'm pretty cool with it. If somebody goes into full attack mode then it feels like there's other motives behind the criticism than the actual music in question and I just wonder what's his/her problem.

 

But I actually like to hear how people visualize my tracks or what kind of feeling they impose. It's usually quite different from what I pictured in my head so most of the time it's really interesting. I know the original sources of the sounds, the life situation I had when I made the tracks, etc. so my own perception is colored by that kind of context.

[Guest AsylumSeaker]

 

I don't think that there's any way to determine whether work is 'good' or 'bad' in more than subjective or statistical terms, but more to the point I don't think it's very useful to try to do so. I don't get much out of it, in any case. When I read or hear criticism which focuses on the perceived quality of the work, my eyes tend to glaze over, because I don't tend to look at things that way myself. I'm more interested in hearing insights into the work that I may have missed, and connections made between it and other things that I might not be aware of. I like criticism that does something to give depth to the work being discussed, whatever it is.

 

Criticism isn't necessarily an assessment of whether something is 'good' or 'bad'.

 

Often it just puts the work in question into some sort of context, or investigates the merits of its aim and execution thereof.

I know, and my point was that prefer the kind of criticism you describe in the second half of your post. Though, I'm not so interested in an investigation of the 'merits' so much as one of the features more generally. I like criticism especially which draws my attention to features I would miss on my own.

[MadameChaos]

Constructive criticism is one thing, but when people are unnecessarily tactless and rude in an attempt to seem funny or clever, it really makes me extremely angry and reflects far more negatively on them than the artist.

[Friendly Foil]

when i thing about criticism...uffff

 

it was like million yrs ago. me having myspace loaded with ambient stuff. some djs asked a friend of mine about me cause they heard that i make noizez and shit and she played some of those tracks right from the page during some gathering at her place. the response was: >>> the music is quite interesting but unfinished; NO KICK DRUMS <<<

 

"When does the music start?"

[MadameChaos]

It's got a good beat! *dances like a twat to imaginary beat*

[Friendly Foil]

"This isn't music. It's just sounds."

[hello spiral]

But I actually like to hear how people visualize my tracks or what kind of feeling they impose. It's usually quite different from what I pictured in my head so most of the time it's really interesting. I know the original sources of the sounds, the life situation I had when I made the tracks, etc. so my own perception is colored by that kind of context.

 

this

[Candiru]

I'm not sure what purpose critics actually serve anymore, not what they used to be. It's mostly used as a means to an end, like hot new releases are showcased on a music related site, with reviews attached that are used as a way to say "this online publication caters to THIS type of readership = positive/negative review." And then people click on the reviews and revenue is earned for the site through ads. Does the reviewer get real weird with it and make an ass of himself on purpose to get attention and notoriety like the Kid A review guy? Or do they use their review as an outlet for their misguided English Lit degree or for whatever baggage they have towards an artist or the music industry? Aren't I clever, the way I bash this album? Ladies?

 

Critics used to be the people that actually DID hear more music than the average person. They heard it before you and had access to much more of it. Now, the playing field is leveled and message boards are filled with opinions on early leaks before a site even gets a chance to review it. You still need the separate the wheat from the chaff, but critics aren't always a huge help in that matter, I'm sure most of you have found. I guess what I'm saying is, a music review on a major music publication's site has so much more weighing in on it than just an opinion on the music that you can't take any of it at face value. The social factors surrounding music have a much MUCH bigger influence on its reception. And if you see that for what it is, you can't unsee it.

[xox]

 

when i thing about criticism...uffff

 

it was like million yrs ago. me having myspace loaded with ambient stuff. some djs asked a friend of mine about me cause they heard that i make noizez and shit and she played some of those tracks right from the page during some gathering at her place. the response was: >>> the music is quite interesting but unfinished; NO KICK DRUMS <<<

 

 

Lol, years ago I had the opposite reaction when someone wrote in a comment to my track that there should never ever be a distorted kick drum in an ambient track.

 

 

heh...also very very stupid.

 

 

when i thing about criticism...uffff

 

it was like million yrs ago. me having myspace loaded with ambient stuff. some djs asked a friend of mine about me cause they heard that i make noizez and shit and she played some of those tracks right from the page during some gathering at her place. the response was: >>> the music is quite interesting but unfinished; NO KICK DRUMS <<<

 

"When does the music start?"

 

 

lol exactly

[LimpyLoo]

 

 

I don't think that there's any way to determine whether work is 'good' or 'bad' in more than subjective or statistical terms, but more to the point I don't think it's very useful to try to do so. I don't get much out of it, in any case. When I read or hear criticism which focuses on the perceived quality of the work, my eyes tend to glaze over, because I don't tend to look at things that way myself. I'm more interested in hearing insights into the work that I may have missed, and connections made between it and other things that I might not be aware of. I like criticism that does something to give depth to the work being discussed, whatever it is.

Criticism isn't necessarily an assessment of whether something is 'good' or 'bad'.

 

Often it just puts the work in question into some sort of context, or investigates the merits of its aim and execution thereof.

I know, and my point was that prefer the kind of criticism you describe in the second half of your post. Though, I'm not so interested in an investigation of the 'merits' so much as one of the features more generally. I like criticism especially which draws my attention to features I would miss on my own.

 

 

Well a good example of the importance of context is when NPR had one of their young interns review an Public Enemy record. Someone with a vast knowledge of the music of history will experience that album much differently than someone who's only familiar with what's been on the radio for the last 3 years.

 

Context is like the Higgs Field that lends mass to sense information. It's kinda like the way that the pain you get from jogging or working out can be enjoyable, but if you had that same exact pain as the result of some horrible disease it would be unpleasant.

 

But judging the "aim and the merits of the aim" is simply inevitable: this is why you wouldn't call Drukqs "the worst country-western album ever made." It's not trying to be country-western, so you wouldn't fault it for failing to be country-western.

 

This is a common problem in informal criticism. Very often you see music criticized for failing to do something its not even trying to do. For this very reason I will sometimes dislike music initially, and then later 'get it' and like it.

[willochill]

Personally, I really don't understand "professional criticism" in any form- whether it's music criticism, movie criticism, etc. It's basically elevating the opinion of one person to a somehow higher position than that of everyone else. It doesn't even matter to me if they're more experienced with music, or they've heard more of it; that makes no difference in terms of musical opinion imo. I think music should first be thought of as a subjective experience, and secondly as something to be shared-that is, when choosing which music does or doesn't suit you, you should put your own opinion first, and then after that it's a good experience to share music and your opinion of it with others.In addition, it bothers the shit out of me anytime anyone calls any piece of music "bad" or "good"- it's sort of saying, "my opinion of it is the only acceptable one that anyone should ever have, period." I prefer to say "I don't like it" or "I love it," or at least using adjectives while assuring that the opinion is not objective.

Another point is that I don't think music should be analyzed or observed as much as it is- people should just listen to it and enjoy it without having to break it down and look at it under a microscope.

In terms of "good taste," I don't really think that it exists, but I think Mesh Gear Fox put it perfectly here:

i guess good taste would be someone who listens to good music and is open minded to new music and not overly dismissive.

 

This is sort of why I'm interested more in people that like styles of music that not very many people listen to... because I know then that it's someone who is perhaps more open-minded than someone who listens to popular music, although obviously this isn't always the case. For example, I quite like metalheads not because I like heavy metal, which I don't really, but because they're open minded enough not to "follow the crowd." That being said, I wouldn't say someone is worse of a person if they happened to like music that a lot of other people do.

[LimpyLoo]

Eh, it's not that simple.

 

 

 

Whether you like it or not, when you listen to music your brain is doing more than just processing raw sound.

[hoggy]

Well a good example of the importance of context is when NPR had one of their young interns review an Public Enemy record. Someone with a vast knowledge of the music of history will experience that album much differently than someone who's only familiar with what's been on the radio for the last 3 years.

 

Context is like the Higgs Field that lends mass to sense information. It's kinda like the way that the pain you get from jogging or working out can be enjoyable, but if you had that same exact pain as the result of some horrible disease it would be unpleasant.

 

But judging the "aim and the merits of the aim" is simply inevitable: this is why you wouldn't call Drukqs "the worst country-western album ever made." It's not trying to be country-western, so you wouldn't fault it for failing to be country-western.

 

This is a common problem in informal criticism. Very often you see music criticized for failing to do something its not even trying to do. For this very reason I will sometimes dislike music initially, and then later 'get it' and like it.

Isn't it ok to dislike music even if you don't understand it though? (On the understanding that it's just your reaction, like if you ate a type of food you haven't tried and didn't like it, and that your opinion shouldn't be taken too seriously)

 

You know, like if your initial reaction was 'this sucks!' but not 'this sucks and you're an idiot for liking it', wouldn't that be ok?

 

In a similar way, I'm not sure whether it's disrespectful to tell a religious person there's no god if there's no malice in your heart when you say it - saying 'there's no god' in a certain way just means 'there's no god in my subjective experience' and not 'there's no god and you're an idiot for believing there is'. I don't want to start a religious debate it's just a comparison, because I think people feel as strongly about the music they like as they do about their religious beliefs

 

--

 

Maybe again the answer is context - who are you talking to, in what context, like if you're with a trusted friend you might personally insult each other and nobody mind