Music is not art

Music is not art.

Is painting the mona lisa a dozen times with small things changed art?
Why would mediocre rock bands that saturate the radio considered art?


There is art in music but its not art as a whole.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=iVWky83tcjM
docs.google.com/document/d/1nl0mrU-C3O9gH2u4vN6Ytr3sE8ZLEsT5-HBG0_5XxZ4/edit?usp=drive_web
youtube.com/watch?v=1rmo3fKeveo
youtube.com/watch?v=Cod52XVxdOU
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

That's not how art works. There's bad art and good art, but it's still art. The many genres of art like music and paintings are made of ALL of those things, not just the good stuff

Kys

art is the science of the manipulation of a given sensory organ to stimulate the release of endorphins, serotonin, or dopamine.

music is the purest form of art. you dont need to have any experience or speak any language to appreciate its beauty

...

nah fag.

even the mention of the word artist dont amount to anything extraordinary since that is a general term. there's no such thing as a bad artist or bad art because such things are ignored anyway and never warrant any real movement from anyone.

guitarists, the term, on the other hand notes a certain level of skill. A pianist certainly notes a masterful skill in performance and repetition of works.

there is no such thing as interpretation of landscapes of a previous artist, but there is such thing as interpretation of works done by a composer.

It's not art because people get so fucking mad over it. Do you see people calling each other faggots over statues and paintings? No, but you see faggots screaming til their throat ruptures over stupid shit like industrial or pop or hip-hop

art is not a science and there is no such things as a pure form of art.

landscape paintings can be subjective but if you play Mozart works and fuck up, you are considered in need of practice until you get it right.

Ever heard of a drummer get successful playing out of rhythm?

artists can get away with painting outside the lines. a drummer cannot.

music is a skill or performance. and also a craft if you are into recording.
you can gain a title of professional skill that is independent from a general term of artist.
hence music is not an art.

What about the people who write the music though.

What do you think avant garde is then? You fucking moron.

> an artist can paint outside the lines, a drummer cannot
Have you heard of improv music? Beautiful improvised drum solos.
What lines are they playing in?

Na son art can definitely be considered bad, notably in the instance if recreating art (performing music). Who are you trying to tell there's no such thing as bad art. Try reading the five nights at Freddy's novel and tell me how good it is.

The musician is not the artist, the conposer is.

song writer or composer/arranger.

an example is taylor swift. shes titled as a singer and song writer but not an artist.

independent titles.

in art you have illustrator, painter, cartoonist, ect. they are known fields of actual art. but it starts and stops at the visual.

the truth

Technically, everything that is made for human enjoyment by sensing it, can be called art.

Even Porn
And even Shrek

True, but I would group both music and visual art (as well as film and litrature) into the broader catagorie of art. This being an expresion of creativity through manipulation of one or more sences.

the avant-garde (from French, "advance guard" or "vanguard", literally "fore-guard") are people or works that are experimental, radical, or unorthodox, with respect to art, culture, and society.

>with respect to art, culture, and society.
>with respect to art

its still independent from art. if you were to take away the context of unorthodox it would be considered bad playing.
Would you listen to a guitar player who calls himself a composer pick strings randomly and at random tempo for 10 minutes and consider him respectful to Bach?

shit, would you pay $1000 to see led zepplin plastered and stumble all over the stage for an hour and not play one of their covers or singles at all?

What about black midi composers. Their music forms beautiful, though abstract, streams and images, hence a visual artistic element.

music, as i stated before, can be a craft in regard to recording and playback which is not art but a skill. there can be art in context with music. but music itself is not an art.

youtube.com/watch?v=iVWky83tcjM

docs.google.com/document/d/1nl0mrU-C3O9gH2u4vN6Ytr3sE8ZLEsT5-HBG0_5XxZ4/edit?usp=drive_web

At this point though, it is just an oppinion. You could make that case against whole genres of music. In the end, it comes down to your own musical tastes. Some like Mozart, some like really shit music. Its tgeir choice.

I don't think you understand, nobody plays black midi. It is drawn by a human and played by a computer. It's piano roll is arguably more visually stimulating than the music itself. In this respect it is similar to someone making pixel art. How is this not visual art.

...

sadly this guy is unknown and would never be in the spotlight next to mozart because of bias in the western world. however his performance still contains structure, meaning his whole culture has a way of doing things correctly. If you listen closely, it almost sounds like appalachian mountain music,
youtube.com/watch?v=1rmo3fKeveo

in art, there is no structure unless you are interpreting real things. and your finished product is subjective and can either be loved by all or none. But no one is going tell you to stop.
music can never be as free art since it is meant to be consumed by other people from the start.

>are you an artist?
youtube.com/watch?v=Cod52XVxdOU

i thought you meant a black person making midi music.

but either way, your brain tries to make sense of that shit and picks out notes because you have exhausted your senses to commercial music.
Its not art.