Harmony Korine + Selena Gomez

You can pass judgement on "sincerity" all you wish. My claim is that such judgement cannot be called accurate until after the fact is revealed (by the artist), and so any judgement on sincerity is not an argument worth pursuing if you are after truth. It is hearsay. Perhaps I'm just a better liar than most, but I have no doubt that many artists are capable of making "sincere"-seeming works that are nothing but tricks. Judging based on this criteria is not reliable.

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:39 AM, luke viia said:

AE does not connect with all listeners. "Emotionally powerful" is a subjective experience. Music cannot be judged objectively.

I think it can be... when you have pop songs all singing about the same subject matter and is produced by a collection of people rather than a singular vision... through that process and context the music is less sincere than creation from out of someones bedroom with no $$$ associated with it.

By the way, I jump from genre to genre in my own music, and if you called me insincere for something like that, I'd just lol at you and keep on doing my thing.

Perhaps I am just far less cynical?

... I didn't think I'd ever get to say that so thank you!

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:44 AM, compson said:

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:39 AM, luke viia said:

AE does not connect with all listeners. "Emotionally powerful" is a subjective experience. Music cannot be judged objectively.

 

I think it can be... when you have pop songs all singing about the same subject matter and is produced by a collection of people rather than a singular vision... through that process and context the music is less sincere than creation from out of someones bedroom with no $$$ associated with it.

No, I disagree. Pop songs repeat the same trite formula because that formula connects with people, and the listeners feel it sincerely.

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:45 AM, luke viia said:

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:44 AM, compson said:

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:39 AM, luke viia said:

AE does not connect with all listeners. "Emotionally powerful" is a subjective experience. Music cannot be judged objectively.

 

I think it can be... when you have pop songs all singing about the same subject matter and is produced by a collection of people rather than a singular vision... through that process and context the music is less sincere than creation from out of someones bedroom with no $$$ associated with it.

 

No, I disagree. Pop songs repeat the same trite formula because that formula connects with people, and the listeners feel it sincerely.

It connects with people sure... but do you listen to the top 10? I don't because it all sounds like the same thing. And as a human with a brain that likes to explore and see/hear new things the idea of pursuing something in that kind of realm makes me feel a bit sick.

Following a rule book is like computing numbers vs drawing a picture. Sincerity is individual expression and I personally believe everyone is unique and different, so when I see mass culture perpetuating the same kind of stuff, its because its marketable and easy to sell... not because it is sincere. Lots of people eat McDonalds, but I have had much better food. Would you disagree with that as well?

I listen to some billboard rated songs, yes. I also explore other sounds. You can feel sick all you want, what you can't do is judge music objectively. That is all I am saying.

BTW, I have created entirely insincere music in my bedroom with no cash incentive. It is created for various motives, and often sounds sincere at the end. Attempting to predict the motives of artists is a subjective experience; you and I will hear different things in different songs.

How do you know it all sounds the same if you don't listen to it?

HMMMMMM

Jumping from genre to genre is much different than jumping from trend to trend. I didn't realize that was such a hard distinction to make.

To reiterate - (jesus how the fuck did we get here) - the sincerity thing is not the only or main reason i think Skrillex's music is bad.

The argument in the first place was saying that Skrillex has earned the praise that is lavished upon him, after one release in the brostep style. I doubt his sincerity in making the music because he loves it, but I think it's bad because, well it fucking is lol.

Yes, his music is fucking atrocious. Lol. I walked in to this argument at the tail end, sorry for the tangential shit stirring.

Who the fuck is Selena Gomez?

re: trends vs genres -- skrillex may just be a dumbass and his tastes may follow trends. He doesn't have to be a caniving con-artist to do this, just a retard.

Four releases, not including singles

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:47 AM, compson said:

Following a rule book is like computing numbers vs drawing a picture. Sincerity is individual expression and I personally believe everyone is unique and different, so when I see mass culture perpetuating the same kind of stuff, its because its marketable and easy to sell... not because it is sincere. Lots of people eat McDonalds, but I have had much better food. Would you disagree with that as well?

Mcdonalds and electronic music are not subjects that can be switcheroo'd quite so easily. Your conclusions about mass culture are yours, they are not facts. Objectivity implies fact.

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:51 AM, luke viia said:

I listen to some billboard rated songs, yes. I also explore other sounds. You can feel sick all you want, what you can't do is judge music objectively. That is all I am saying.

 

BTW, I have created entirely insincere music in my bedroom with no cash incentive. It is created for various motives, and often sounds sincere at the end. Attempting to predict the motives of artists is a subjective experience; you and I will hear different things in different songs.

My Mcdonalds analogy stands... because mainstream music is designed to please mass culture based on trends and science (what sounds pleasing to our ears)... just as McDonalds burgers are designed to be tasty and addicting. However you can tell there is no fucking soul in a McDonalds burger.

And anyone who only subjects themselves to that narrow of a palette is objectively less qualified to judge the spectrum. Saying there is no way to objectively qualify something is incorrect I think... throughout history there are artists that changed how we see or hear things... and that is objectively better for humanity than artists that only stick with the norms. We'd still be making cave drawings and shit.

No, it does not stand. Mainstream music, at base, is still made by individuals, and it changes as people's tastes change. It is not 100% "designed" based on science, I am not sure where you got that idea. It may be designed to a degree, but not in the same way a burger is. Even if it was, who's to say that the original Mcdonalds brand was not "sincere" in giving people something they thought was valuable?

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:52 AM, chenGOD said:

(jesus how the fuck did we get here)

  On 8/14/2012 at 1:00 AM, luke viia said:

No, it does not stand. Mainstream music, at base, is still made by individuals, and it changes as people's tastes change. It is not 100% "designed" based on science, I am not sure where you got that idea. It may be designed to a degree, but not in the same way a burger is. Even if it was, who's to say that the original Mcdonalds brand was not "sincere" in giving people something they thought was valuable?

When making money is the bottom line, if they could use science to make popular music they would. That's my point.

If someone said McDonalds was their favorite food or Justin Bieber would you value that opinion as much as someone like John Peel, who has listened to a vast range of music and styles?

  On 8/14/2012 at 1:02 AM, gmanyo said:

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:52 AM, chenGOD said:

(jesus how the fuck did we get here)

That would be me.

But what would watmm be without a good argument?

@compson: No, nor would I automatically value someone's opinion just for liking John Peel. Here's a question for you: if pop music is made as a formulaic attempt at money-making, why do so many people write it in their bedrooms with no cash incentive?

  On 8/14/2012 at 1:02 AM, gmanyo said:

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:52 AM, chenGOD said:

(jesus how the fuck did we get here)

Compson and I got into the thread.

Look guys, I think that we can all at least agree that Harmony Korine's next masterpiece, which involves a quadriplegic with Asperger's butchering a thalidomide baby to a dubstep remix of "She'll Be Comin' Round the Mountain", is going to be fucking ACE.

No we can't, I doubt his sincerity and he is obviously doing it for the money.

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:55 AM, compson said:

And anyone who only subjects themselves to that narrow of a palette is objectively less qualified to judge the spectrum. Saying there is no way to objectively qualify something is incorrect I think... throughout history there are artists that changed how we see or hear things... and that is objectively better for humanity than artists that only stick with the norms. We'd still be making cave drawings and shit.

Dude please stop writing entire paragraphs after I respond, lol. I really don't follow your argument here, btw. Of course there are artists that change how we see things, how is this related to objectively judging their output? As a stupid side question: If you saw two cave drawings, could you objectively decide which was better? You could critique it all you want, but you'd never be objective.

I will agree there is a point where music is a subjective experience... but there's objective qualities to it as well. It's not so black and white... but there are levels of experience. That's why we read cook books from experience chefs who know all types of foods etc... or we listen to musicians like WATMM artists because they explore different arenas and use different influences. There is objective value in that compared to say a bunch of executives deciding on which tracks to release, or how about movie studios using test audiences and then changing the film based on what some random 200 people said in a survey. Theres a point in this whole process where sincerity goes out the window because there is no longer a singular personal identity behind it.

  On 8/14/2012 at 1:06 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

Look guys, I think that we can all at least agree that Harmony Korine's next masterpiece, which involves a quadriplegic with Asperger's butchering a thalidomide baby to a dubstep remix of "She'll Be Comin' Round the Mountain", is going to be fucking ACE.

  On 8/14/2012 at 1:08 AM, luke viia said:

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:55 AM, compson said:

And anyone who only subjects themselves to that narrow of a palette is objectively less qualified to judge the spectrum. Saying there is no way to objectively qualify something is incorrect I think... throughout history there are artists that changed how we see or hear things... and that is objectively better for humanity than artists that only stick with the norms. We'd still be making cave drawings and shit.

 

Dude please stop writing entire paragraphs after I respond, lol. I really don't follow your argument here, btw. Of course there are artists that change how we see things, how is this related to objectively judging their output? As a stupid side question: If you saw two cave drawings, could you objectively decide which was better? You could critique it all you want, but you'd never be objective.

There's Kubrick and then there's Michael Bay.... if you can't say objectively Kubrick did more for film than Michael Bay, then I don't know what.

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:53 AM, luke viia said:

Yes, his music is fucking atrocious. Lol. I walked in to this argument at the tail end, sorry for the tangential shit stirring.

 

Who the fuck is Selena Gomez?

 

re: trends vs genres -- skrillex may just be a dumbass and his tastes may follow trends. He doesn't have to be a caniving con-artist to do this, just a retard.

Quite possibly - reference his haircut. It's just that the jump between trends is quite extreme. Still, I like the retard theory.

Oh and Selena Gomez is some jailbait from the disney channel.

  On 8/14/2012 at 12:54 AM, Dan C said:

Four releases, not including singles

Huh?

My name is Skrillex (self released, no one cared)

Scary monsters and Nice Sprites (the one that got the hype)

what else? everything else on discogs seems to be singles, remixes, or compilations of singles.