Do You Believe In Objectively Good Music Taste ?

>>70323220
No. Not possible.

>>70323220
maybe

>>70324717
No.

Rather strangely, I don't believe in objective good but I do believe in objective bad. Some things just seem so fucking shit and irredeemable that you have to be wrong to like them.

Music is art, and the thing about art is the only thing that matters is how it makes you feel emotionally. It either moves you or it doesn't. If it does then to you it's good, if not then it's bad. This applies to everyone so stop shitting on people's music taste even if to you it's dogshit.

>>70323220
Sure, if songs can be objectively good then why can't your music taste?

It's not possible to prove whether a song is objectively good, therefore objectively good music doesn't exist, and therefore neither does objective taste. So no.

Yea, Scaruffi

>>70323220
theyre objectively good if therye the ones i like

>>70323220
to a certain extent

i believe people have different taste and can like or not like something i dont.
that being said there are some groups i can think of where i refuse to believe anyone unironically likes(corey feldman, kid cudi, captain beefheart, grimes are a just a few off the top of my head)

File: LongcattacgnoL.jpg (880KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

880KB, 1680x1050px

I have peered, if only for a brief period, outside the sphere of human awareness.

I no longer believe in objectivity as we can perceive it.

>>70326002
this

>>70326167
Yeah, dropping acid was pretty dope for me too.

>>70323220
Anyone who prefers Classical or Traditional music of Popular music.

Yes but I know I don't have it so I don't care much.

>>70323220
go away, limedibagels

>>70328557
lmao all classical music sounds exactly the same.

>>70326167
This. The universe, life, reality are all subjective

The idea that taste in something so widely subjective as art can be objectively measured is stupidity.

So it's not surprising a lot of users of this board feel you can.

>>70323220
Nah

Something about human perceptions and constructs being used as instruments of measurement that are in and of themselves relative by being made by humans in the first place or whatever.

It's just like math, we use it to measure and explain something that can't truly be measured and we have no solid grasp of. It's just putting a system of enumeration into a cosmos of infinite possibility.

t.Psuedo intellectual.

If classical, objective

If popular, subjective

>>70329084
You're a moron. All art is equally subjective.

>>70329143
how about I whip my .44 out and shoot you in head

>>70329173
I'd rather you didn't.

>>70329185
oh ok sorry

File: 50f2d2acf85e20edd2baccb993d942c5.jpg (16KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 300x300px

>>70329225
It's quite alright. Here's an black QT for your trouble.

>>70323220
Don't worry guys, patrician in here for the verdict.

Yes, you can have objectively good taste, I proved so.

musical quality or worth is subjective but musical taste is partially objective -- you can have misinformed or ignorant opinions

>>70328626
Notice how it doesn't:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7M0MZ424g0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRfF7W4El60

No other music is so diverse.

I think the reason we personally like a song or any piece of art is ultimately beyond our reach (could be unconscious drives and fixations from moments of your life, could be biological predetermined tastes, could be a lot of things).
But we can make up some rationalizations to justify our subjective tastes, and play a language game of comparing and debating our rationalizations with each others. There is some space for objectivity here, I believe there are some criteria for better or worse rationalizations. Since this is a (kind of a) game and the main purpose is to communicate, a good rationalization probably points you toward specific aspects of the art piece and makes you see it differently. Relating it to other works or context may be a good idea, specially if there are common-ground accepted good artists (remember, the game is to convince the other of your opinion and of your rationalization's validity). Bad ones could be just bad arguments/rationalizations (e.g everybody likes it! this critic likes it!) or just plain refusing to play the game ("i like it because i like it, stop bothering me". "its all subjective shut up")
I do think that if one chooses to live his life without questioning or trying to explain/rationalize his taste he is an objectively inferior listener, since you always gain a lot from playing the game

>>70323220
>Aguirre
Herzogbro

>>70323220
Only that The Beatles are objectively good

>>70329549
this statement is retarded and fucking wrong fundamentally

but I still agree with it