Where do you stand in the Pyramid of Taste?

File: You_Only_Live_Twice_-_UK_cinema_poster.jpg (156KB, 600x462px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 600x462px

>>68624374
type 0

fim music fan...

ranging from 0-3
probably like most of /mu/

>>68624374
Type V of course

with the first taste, like you would any other pyramid

>Klezmer
>Higher on the pyramid than Ambient, Sludge Metal, Grindcore and Post Rock
Klezmer is a way easier listen than all of those

File: pyramid.jpg (1MB, 2475x1799px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2475x1799px

Stop posting the old one, nerd.

0-2
>gypsy jazz in type 2
It should be in Type-0 IMO. Its an easy genre to listen to.

0-3
>>68624482
I think most of /mu/ is from 0-2 actually

Type 2 is the lowest I accept at parties.
Type 4 in the sanctity of my personal home.
I usually carry heavy duty earplugs should I accidentally encounter Type 0 out in public.

free improvisation should be higher, not to mention you can free improv any genre so its kinda stupid.

the best musicians of all time beethoven, bach, chopin. all though improvised music as the absolute peak of musicality

>>68624683
I don't think so. Being on this board you WILL eventually encounter something from Tier III, and seeing as some of the stuff there are actually pretty easy to look up and listen to, I'd say that at least a considerable percentage of the people on this board are into something from that tier.
>>68624690
Why do you hate music?

>>68624579
>by hampus
D R O P P E D

>>68624746
I don't even know how to respond to this.

Welcome to /mu/?

>>68624374
almost entirely type 0
I sometimes listen to prog rock

Type 0 - 2

I feel like wonky should be higher up in the pyramid

>>68624374
Type III, I like it

>>68624374
Type III

>Delta Blues in type 1
If traditional folk is in type III so should Charlie Patton et al

>>68624374
in the god you´re a fucking nerd who needs to get laid OP section

you literally stated that all popular genres are bad and shit nobody listens to is good because it´s obscure. jump in a pool full of fedoras

>>68624374
>yodeling higher on list than eurodance
lmfao what kinda fucking retard makes these

>>68625150
Welcome to /mu/.

>>68625173
Creator here, please make any complaints to me so I can ignore them complete since you're completely ignorant and tasteless. Thanks.

>>68625150
>you´re a fucking nerd who needs to get laid OP section
What's the logic here?
Does getting laid worsen one's taste in music?

>>68625150
I'll give this post a solid 8/10

>there are people who listen to anything above III
some people just try too hard

My favourite artists are either type I or type III.
I listen to 0 and II a lot, IV occasionally.
As for type V, I would lie if I said I listen to those.

>>68624374
Type 3 but in my library is music from all types.

>>68624374
0 - Normal People
1 - "Odd" People
2 - Patricians
3 - Posers
4 and 5 - Liars

>>68625537
t. embryo

>>68625537
0 - sub 100 IQ ultra plebs
1 - normal people
2 - babbie's first real music
3 - well-grounded taste
4 - respectable interest in music
5 - fully informed music listener

>>68624374
type 3

polite sage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaOa28SoBJE
so this is sonorism, huh

>>68625556
Fuck off RYMfag

>>68625575
fuck off poser

>>68625575
baha you can't honestly think this?

bet your favourite group is radiohead too, hahaha

>>68625688
Radiohead is Type 1 or 2 at best.

>>68624374
i don't see any reason to go past type II

>>68625575
>>>/trash/

>>68625719
more like 0.
1 at a push...

get over yourself.

>>68625719
>Radiohead
>Type 2

Top Zozzle

my taste is so good I only listen to recordings of my own farts

>>68625770
>>68625782
t. avant-teen posers

>>68625575
0 - normal people
1 - well-grounded taste
2 - respectable interest in music
3 - fully informed music listener
4 - pretentious fag
5 - pretentious fag

>>68625851
(You)

>>68625863
not an argument

>>68625870
bait doesn't warrant arguments

>>68625888
t. avant-teen

>>68625888
>bait
you're just offended because someone doubted your """patrician""" (read: pretentious) taste.

>>68625920
t. pleb
>>68625925
nice projection

Calling things you don't understand pretentious is the same as just saying you don't understand it

what's sad is there's probably a few people that think like this, please find a better use of your time.
for example picking off this list, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danger_music
please kill yourself if you think this is anything other than a joke.
australians stoking the fire please go away it's not funny.
why do music fans get so up their ass? I like physical art and can appreciate cartoons as well as picasso or touluse latrec, why do you act like theres some penultimate taste when it comes to listening to fucking noise made by instruments? cant you like pop music and classical music?

>>68625983
Can you enjoy McDonald's once you tasted Haute Cuisine?

>>68625983
doesn't seem like a joke to me

>>68626029
it's not an apt comparison because the level of skill required to make cuisine is obviously more involved than unthawing a meat patty, something like "danger music" which could be some deranged asshole screaming at someone under the label of "it's music" doesnt require more talent than playing some notes on a guitar.

>>68626033
> For instance, some extreme examples of danger music direct performers to use sounds so loud that they will deafen the participants,
how is that not a joke, and pretentious as well? how does that require more skill than some mainstream pop band performing a song?

>>68626102
What makes it a joke or pretentious? What has skill got to do with anything?

>>68626125
>what makes it a joke or pretentious
>attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS5ZkPXkto0
this video is pretentious, "danger music" is pretentious.
do you think this is important? that the person in the video posesses a talent? if the answer is no than you could understand why I'd call it pretentious.

>>68624374

90% of the "genres" in the upper pyramid aren't real. This chart gets always posted by newfags.

>>68626211
Let's see you try to scream like that bub

File: 1475231349636.png (75KB, 695x586px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 695x586px

>>68626244
>sonorism isn't real
>xenharmonism isn't real
>new complexiy isn't real

>>68626244
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonorism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenharmonic_music
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleatoric_music
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_music
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic#Music
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Complexity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminacy_(music)

Congrats on being uninformed

>>68626245
maybe I'd give it a go if I realized I posessed no creative talent and had to resort to making up "genres" of "music"

>>68626211
People seriously listen to this?

>>68624711
t. Autism

>>68626211
>do you think this is important?
Personally no, but it's to early to tell
>that the person in the video posesses a talen
He seems to be very tolerant to pain
>if the answer is no than you could understand why I'd call it pretentious.
Is it though? The concept seems pretty straightforward to me. "Pretentious" is the person who considers it highbrow

>>68626271
>some obscure thing related to music has a wikipedia page
>therefore its good and important

>>68626317
the faggy intro, calling it a score, labeling this as a track, and presenting it as music is what's pretentious. come on man.

>>68626330
Anon said they weren't real genres of music, but they are, and many of them have been around for decades. I honestly don't know enough about contemporary academic music to say whether or not this stuff is good or important. You could at the very least listen to some of the music before judging it though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0F2Z78IRcY

Sounds pretty cool honestly.

>>68626211
>How many ways can we present primal screaming as worthy art or valid expression?
Well let's look at this fuckwits scrunched up face and manner, then stop looking, forever.

I'm preferring Type-V over "conventional" recorded music these days.

I like to set up a self-playing patch on my Eurorack modular and just sit and listen to it evolving.

Linear music (i.e. with a predetermined, recorded structure in time) is boring now.

File: wew mad.jpg (38KB, 400x462px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 400x462px

>mfw I'm just another Type 0

>>68626351
Seems like a bored academic to me. And I'm pretty sure they're treating it as a composition only because Higgins was an actual composer. Nobody really takes this seriously, it's musical dead end

>>68626391
this just sounds like ambient music to me.

>>68626463
It predates ambient music, though it probably influenced it.

type 0-3 (a little bit of 4, but mostly 2)

>>68626532
that's cool and it's important to be informed about history related to something you're interested in but labeling sonorism high tier along with random stuff like danger music and labeling ambient music as low tier makes this a shitty trolling attempt at best and retarded at worst

What the fuck is evolutionary music?

>>68626598
Oh yeah I agree that this chart is fucking stupid but when people say "THOSE GENRES AREN'T EVEN REAL" it's just as fucking stupid. Like if you want to know what xenharmonicism is just google it it's 2017 for fuck's sake

>>68626637

That still doesn't make it a real genre. It's just some small artistic movement/experimentation. Most of the upper genres don't have more than 10 releases each.

>>68626744
>Most of the upper genres don't have more than 10 releases each.

hahahahaha

I don't think you understand

>>68624374
mostly type i and ii, some type iii (zeuhl and avant-prog)

there is no logic to that pyramid btw

>>68624374
can someone explain the background image and why one of the dudes has a fake face, pretty fucking creepy

>>68624374
Furtherest I've made it to is type 3

>>68626804
yeah explain then you pretentious fuckwad
>muh recording of a cheese grater being thrown down an elevator shaft

>>68626899
Stop. Slow down. Educate yourself.

>>68626899
>>muh recording of a cheese grater being thrown down an elevator shaft

Implying it is even being recorded, or should be

>>68626934
why shouldn't it be? I'll just call it shaft core and perform it widely enough that it warrants a wikipedia page. there's nothing you could do to stop me.

>>68626981
>there's nothing you could do to stop me.
and yet this anon keeps browsing 4chan instead of creating a new genre

>>68626981
Good luck with that. I predict failure.

>>68626981
Just trying to help free you from the concepts of 'genre', 'release' and 'recording'.

That's essentially the hierarchy in the pyramid.

Written and recorded "compositions" at the bottom, sound free from the limitations of predeterminism, recording or even instruments at the top.

>>68627034
not the same anon you replied to but why not just say that instead of HAHAHAHA EDUCATE URSLEF PLEB

File: DDX-10 - Nonholomorphic - cover.png (213KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 1000x1000px

Type 5 Stochasticism

also this chart is terrible and has always been

>>68624482
i feel like the thing that slips most people into tier III is avant garde jazz. most people here jam a little sun ra yeah?

0-2 and 5, I don't listen to anything from 3 and 4.

>>68624374
Every part. I don't consider myself as a meloman, more a pragmatic listener. I don't care that much about the technic, it's all about the moment.
Ô mathématiques saintes, puissiez-vous, par votre commerce perpétuel, consoler le reste de mes jours de la méchanceté de l'Homme et de l'injustice du Grand-Tout !