Music doesn't need to sound good to be good

>music doesn't need to sound good to be good

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=tyxptMXt41M
youtube.com/watch?v=r6mzoso95-Q
youtube.com/watch?v=YW6eHunEysA
twitter.com/AnonBabble

qwhos said this

Literally no one has said this

Go back to your zone warp you cyborg bot imbecile

OP did, just then

Do NOT respond to this thread. This is a bot thread.

Sup Forums

who said this for OP to be quoting from?

examples

[citation needed]

youtube.com/watch?v=tyxptMXt41M

explain this then

>sound doesn't need to be music to sound good

Dude are you trying to get warped into a cyborg?

I guess he's talking about TMR

Do NOT respond to this thread unless you want to get warped into a cyborg. This is a BOT THREAD.

how about 'good' is a buzzword in the first place

pulse demon

cyborg me up mommy

explain

but tmr sounds good. Why is this always the album people bring up when people start talking about music that sounds """""""bad"""""""? Different things sound good to different people.

Idk, I haven't actually heard TMR...

...

Because it soudns fucking bad you dummy

Music sounding good is the only way it is good. That's the entire point, to me.

But it doesn't sound bad, you dummy.

i am astounded by the severity of your faggotry terminate your existence immediately before making the world more aids infested

I know exactly what he means.

Good and bad are relative.

tmr sounds better than most other music out there in my opinion

Why?
Wrong

I've never heard of tmr, but some of the greatest, most complicated music I enjoy has been described to me as 'boring' by others. Hearing that really opened my eyes to how subjective taste in art can be and how pointless it is to debate it.

>Why?
because it is pleasing to listen too. I like how the instruments riff off each other and the drums are phenomenal. Some of the most creative blues rock music ever made.

>because it is pleasing to listen too
Why?
>I like how the instruments riff off each other
How so?
>drums are phenomenal
IN what way?

>Some of the most creative blues rock music ever made.
You are right, but it still soudns bad.

You're not worthy of a proper response.

Wow clearly you are a great musical thinker

>it sounds good because I like it!
kek

Robutts?

harsh noise is bad and only masochists listen to it

>music doesn't need to satisfy an audience to be good

>music doesn't need to sound good to be good
so this is the logic of swans fan.

I'm not the guy you originally replied to.

And?

You are POSTING IN A CYBORG THREAD, FUCKING IDIOTS.

ARE YOU FUCKING CRAZY.

>what is music theory

????

this is not me disregard this post please
>I like how the instruments riff off each other
>How so?
There's a few different ways they do it.
>one instrument plays a riff, then another finishes it
>2 instruments play a riff that sounds completely different at first, but it resolves in a way so that one complements the other
>one instrument plays a riff and another instrument plays a much simpler version of the riff underneath, with harmonic notes that complement the main riff
>2 instruments play completely different riffs, that when put together sound like a unique 3rd riff that sounds nothing like the two that make it up
Things like that. I think it's cool, because it's not something you see in blues or rock music a lot, except maybe in the music of the people he influenced, like new wave music.
Try to listen to how the guitars interact with each other on this song: youtube.com/watch?v=r6mzoso95-Q
>drums are phenomenal
>In what way?
The drums don't really count the time. Instead, they're treated as a fourth instrument that kind of ties the guitar parts to the bass. Therefore you get these really funky arhythmic drum patterns you don't really see much of anywhere else. The drums are probably the best part of the album. Listen to the drums on this song youtube.com/watch?v=YW6eHunEysA
>because it is pleasing to listen too
>Why?
Other than the above things, the notes the instruments play are nothing out of the ordinary. Beefheart wrote all these songs with basic blues scales, and a lot of the riffs on this album are pretty standard blues riffs. It's like a blues album on steroids. It shouldn't really sound bad to be honest. I feel it just throws a lot of people off guard, because it's not an album you can listen to in the background. You have to pay attention to it while you're listening to it. Also, 3 of the first 5 songs on the album being some of the hardest to get into on the album might make someone quit listeningearly

omfg dude shut up you are the only one posting in the bot thread, all the other posts are bots. brainlet human.

Yeah but it still sounds bad.

I encountered a poster who believed this on Sup Forums. He was a wannabe patrician electronic listener who only liked boring early 20th century academic WAM electronic music and claimed it was "the best electronic music". He actually claimed repeatedly that the fact that Stockhausen's music was historically important made it good music.

I explained why I liked it and why it sounds good to me, which is what you asked. You're allowed to have a different opinion from me. If you think basic blues notes, harmonies, and riffs sound bad, that's just like, your opinion, man.

>I explained why I liked it
Not what we are discussing
>it soudns good to me, therefor it doesn't sound bad!
Not how it works
>You're allowed to have a different opinion from me
What? I never stated my opinion

Sup Forumscore

>Not what we are discussing
You literally asked me why I thought it sounded good.
>>it sounds good to me, therefor it doesn't sound bad!
When did I say that? I never said it doesn't sound bad for other people. The sheer amount of hate the album gets and the amount of poseurs who think it is only good because it sounds bad is evidence enough this is not correct. Nice morphing what I said so you could bait out another reply from me.
>What? I never stated my opinion
yes you did. You literally just did:

>When did I say that?
See >and the amount of poseurs who think it is only good because it sounds
How is that wrong?
>yes you did. You literally just did:
No that is not my opinion of the album.

Faggot

I did say some reasons why I think people might think it sounds bad, but I never said it needs to sound good to everyone. Also, you don't get it if you think it is good because it sounds bad. Why listen to music if you think it sounds bad. It's good, because it sounds good, not the other way around.

>but I never said it needs to sound good to everyone
Quote me where I said you said that
>you don't get it if you think it is good because it sounds bad.
Why not? Isn't that the point?
>Why listen to music if you think it sounds bad
For appreciation? Because it's interesting or fascinating?

Wait, do you actually enjoy TMR?

...

>Quote me where I said you said that
>>it soudns good to me, therefor it doesn't sound bad!
>Why not? Isn't that the point?
no it's not the point. It's supposed to sound good to people who enjoy that kind of music. If your opinion is that it fails miserably and sounds like hot garbage, you're allowed to think that. But if you think it sounds like hot garbage, why do you like it. How do you "appreciate" it if it sounds like shit. I do not comprehend. Yes I do actually enjoy tmr. It's a good sounding album in my opinion.

>arguing in a meme thread

I've got nothing better to do. I need to do something to entertain myself for the 60 years or so years I have before I die.

>It's supposed to sound good to people who enjoy that kind of music
No one does.
>If your opinion is that it fails miserably and sounds like hot garbage
When did I say that?
>How do you "appreciate" it if it sounds like shit.
Because appreciation and enjoyment are two separate things
>Yes I do actually enjoy tmr
You are not viewing art correctly.

argue about something that matters then or at the very least don't shit on each other without good premises in your argument. Nothing wrong with what you're doing if you do it correctly

>no one does
I know plenty of people who genuinely do enjoy this album and don't think it sounds like shit
>When did I say that?
you literally said it sounds bad. that is your opinion.
>Because appreciation and enjoyment are two separate things
I guess you could view it incorrectly as an attempt to make the worst sounding music possible, but that wasn't the point of the album.
>You are not viewing art correctly.
is it actually art? beefheart viewed himself as an artist, but really the major thing that separates this album from howling wolf or muddy waters is the layering and the rolls of the instruments. It still sounds like Howling Wolf or Muddy Waters, it's just got a much lusher sound because of the way the songs are written.

>genuinely
Prove it
>you literally said it sounds bad. that is your opinion.
What? No, again, I never stated my opinion.
>I guess you could view it incorrectly as an attempt to make the worst sounding music possible
How is that incorrect?
>but that wasn't the point of the album.
What was the point?
>is it actually art?
Why isn't it?

>What? No, again, I never stated my opinion.
"good" and "bad" are opinion words. There is no such thing as an objective good or bad. Saying the album sounds BAD automatically makes what you said an opinion. Jesus Christ dude
>How is that incorrect?
because that isn't the thought process behind this album. beefheart got depressed after tmr sold like shit, because he tried to make genuinely enjoyable music, and he and the band put in months of effort into making it. The point, what beefheart was trying to do, was create a blues album with the complexity of a classical album. And he did sort of do it, structurally. The way the instruments interact is reminiscent of how instruments interact in a classical song. He tried to reinvent popular music by translating classical songwriting into blues music. Obviously his music is way simpler than a classical composition, as a result of his complete lack of musical training, and is therefore, you really can't compare the two beyond the few basic similarities. Anything can be "art" if you call it art, but any good art takes years of formal training and experience to create. This album is more of a result of beefheart's competition with Zappa and his exposure to classical and more experimental music once being put on Zappa's label, than it is a result of any formal training at all, because he had no formal training. It is not a work on par with classical "art" music, because it is too simple. It's pop music reinvented. It's not art music.