Define "good taste"

Define "good taste"

Any song by Guns n Roses but mostly Sweet Child o Mine

Death grips max volume

Subjective interest

everything but rap, country and metal

/thread

yeah this

Sup Forums-core and rym 3.80+

Death Grops, Swons, Konye West, Neutral Molk Hotel, the list goes on...

mine

You may be sarcastic but 90% of this board really does think this way

Define "define"

yep, pretty much sums it up

functional taste buds

When you can play anything when somebody gives you an AUX cord

Kek

field recordings of farts

This is actually a fantastic question op and perhaps something that is worth having a good discussion over.

People like to say that taste is completely objective but this isn't the case at all if you look at the practical evidence. For instance, the majority of people will largely agree on what is good and what is bad. I know Sup Forumscore is a bit controversial, but most people will look at that list and say (at the very least) "well there's quite a lot of decent stuff on there".

But what is actually common about these things that we can all agree that they are good or bad? I know we all have our own different criteria, some people prefer different things and our perceptions and value systems allow us to interpret things different. But if we interpret things differently, why do we tend to generally reach the same conclusions?

There has to be another layer to the music that which our values and the things that we perceive sit upon, but what are they?

Good taste means being able to enjoy nearly any type of music

this

>mfw suddenly a reasonable, logical and well written message appears on a "taste discusion" thread

copying me

I think having a good taste is having a liking for things that the mayority of the fanbase of something will enjoy too. But it depends on the type of stuff. For example, having good taste in Prog Rock would mean that you normally like Prog Rock acts that when shown to Prog Rock fans most of them will like it (for one reason or another). It could be also that you understand what certain people would like, and what not.

OK Computer
The Bends
Amnesiac
Hail To The Thief
Kid A
In Rainbows
King Of Limbs
A Moon Shaped Pool
Pablo Honey

>But what is actually common about these things that we can all agree that they are good or bad?

I think that art has to be technically competent and aesthetically surprising for it to be good. You can have on of both it will probably be boring or shallow.

Good taste is simply a side effect of liking good music. Thus, the real discussion should be to define "good music"

As you alluded to, good music seems to lack an objective definition, but commonly accepted examples of good music (Sup Forumscore) certainly share similarities. There are always exceptions, but I would argue that said similarities include, but are not limited to the following:
>At least a moderate amount musical ambition/experimentation
>A baseline of instrumental proficiency
>Cohesive sounds/style
>A least somewhat accessible to a large audience
>Ages well

Feel free to change or add your own beliefs on what good music is and/or its characteristics

An extensive library of King Crimson live albums.

fpbp

That's interesting and something I've thought about. People tend to use this definition for describing the difference between the fine arts and liberal arts. Although its not a hard and fast rule.

I think the for something to be "good", it has to be able to communicate or reveal something to you that is not self evident of obvious. Something that is beyond the literal and something that is more felt. Which is why I think when people describe their experiences with their favourite albums, it sounds like a religious revelation from God.

I think this is the key difference between a good album and an okay album.

>At least a moderate amount musical ambition/experimentation
>A baseline of instrumental proficiency
>Cohesive sounds/style
>A least somewhat accessible to a large audience
>Ages well

This is what I was referring to with regards people's personal value systems and perceptions. The albums you like may generally have these things, or a combination of them. But what leads other people, who don't necessarily share these values, to the same conclusions? Can we extract a formula to determine what is good and what isn't, that applies to everything and everyone?

I think its important not to undersell the "it just clicked with me" factor. I think understanding this is the key to understanding what is good music and what isn't. It could even go beyond that and perhaps explain why some people are religious, why some people are good at maths and others aren't and why some people are conservatives or liberals, despite sharing the same evidence.

>Can we extract a formula to determine what is good and what isn't, that applies to everything and everyone?
I was trying to but I guess it's too subjective. That said, I think it would be difficult to find an example of a classic album that contradicts the similarities I listed. They don't hold true for all music, but they're probably accurate for most widely accepted accounts of "good music"

>it has to be able to communicate or reveal something to you that is not self evident of obvious
My grandma always said, "for good music, you have to give back". At least for me, all of my favorite albums earned their spot after I gathered some new significance from them by listening to them multiple times and actively trying to understand them on a deeper level

fuck "good taste" eclectic taste is where it's at

This is a bad ranking

Good taste is defined as "whatever I like"

Your grandmother sounds wise.

Good or discerning judgement, especially with regard to what is aesthetically pleasing, fashionable, polite, or socially appropriate.

Usually people implying by this "taste similar to mine".
I personally think that good taste is refined taste, so person has listened a lot of different albums in different genres and formed his own opinion.

After philosophizing on things you have sensible contact with come up with a trust worthy faculty to assemble your thoughts in the right direction, in other words, finding a gem and saluting your friends.

Being a Sup Forums drone

Enjoying something based on a combination of artistic merit, artistic intent and aesthetic. Good taste is listening to music with the intention of stimulating your mind.

To define good taste, we also need to define bad taste

>liking a song because it's popular
>liking a song because the artist is attractive
>liking a song because it's simple and easy to digest
>liking a song because you're trying to be "unique" or "different"
>liking a song because it's what your friends like

I wasn't being sarcastic

>Good taste is listening to music with the intention of stimulating your mind.

Huh? I didn't know songs are like sudoku puzzles now.

good taste is the taste of the best people
the problem is defining who are the best people since society is not an aristocracy anymore

Different people like different genres.

Nirvana pre-Nevermind and In Utero.

Not only logic puzzles can stimulate the mind, friend.

So people with entry level opinions about music have good taste?

Unironically whatever I listen to.

No.

I think having good taste would mean listening to music with a lot of attention and picking up on the nuances of the sound and of what the artist was trying to convey consciously or subconsciously. Having bad taste would be expecting music to command your enjoyment with minimal attention to detail. The first type of people will generally prefer music that brings new things to the table while the second will probably be annoyed by deviations from what they are used to.

pretty much this

Then nobody to ever exist has had good taste. And anyway you're wrong.

A taste that is exactly like or at least similar to my taste.

Or maybe this.

7.5 or higher in Scaruffi

bohemian rhapsody