Is there such thing as objectively good music?

there might be, but how the fuck could anyone know?

>>69739793
The only objectively good music is Grimes, anything else is subjective.

/thread

Some music are objectively good for certain tasks, but overall, yours is not a valid question, because its missing a variant. Like, something is never just "good", they have to be "good" for or in relation to something else.

>>69739921
>/threading your own post

t. newfag

in an academic context

>>69740016
IE, dance music is objecively good for dancing the way its danced. Conversely, doom drone is objectively bad for dancing the way its done today.

>>69739793
Yes, you posted a composer of it.

File: BN78EYrj3BD.jpg (170KB, 750x578px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 750x578px

Nothing is objectively good...

There is absolutely no objectivity anywhere. Everything is the human condition.

>>69739793
Yes, and any music beyond classical does not fit the criteria.

No all art is subjective, BUT that doesnt mean you cant have a discussion about it

philosophers have been trying to reason about objective good for decades and they are so far down the fucking rabbit hole and there are literally uni course you can do to try and answer this question and there are hundreds of books about this and people spend their lives arguing about this but sure yeah no throw your 2 cent in on 4chan I'm sure you've got it

>>69740017
I'm playing by own rules.

/thread

File: beyonce-jay-z3.jpg (166KB, 659x441px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 659x441px

>>69739793
>Is there such thing as objectively good music?
No, but there is such thing as objectively awful music!