Is it possible to have good taste in music without knowing

>>72495496
>Is it possible to have good taste in music
no

no. how can you know what's good if you can't even read music.

>>72495496
>Is it possible to have good taste
No

You don't need music theory to have any sort of taste in music. There's no objectively good taste, but anyone can have similar taste to you. Which you may aswell call good taste.

>>72495525
or an even smarter argument, how can you like a song if you don't have a bachelors degree of music

>>72495496
I dont think there's a thing as "good" taste in music but there is such a thing as 'informed' taste

wouldn't it make more sense to ask if it's possible to MAKE good music without music theory? that seems to make more sense. either way, you don't need to know it, but I feel like a lot of the hipsters and wiggers on this board would benefit from learning a bit of it, because most criticism here is just "this gives me le feels le CHILL VIBES DUDE". I think you can probably pick up on the nuances of music theory through osmosis without necessarily knowing specific terms and such.

>>72495496
Yes, but probably only if you are droning the taste of people who do understand music theory

>>72495496
No. For instance, if everyone who lack music theory theory knowledge replied to this post with their top 5 artists/musicians/groups, you'd see for yourself.

Is it possible for people who know music theory to write a good song?

A lot of people on here know music theory, yet I haven't heard a single song or album in a share thread worth listening to more than once.

>>72495688
>hipsters
Most people you could reasonably call hipsters on this board have some level of discerning taste. Wiggers are a v. srs problem tho.

Anyone can have 'good' taste in music (whatever that even means) but only people who know music theory are really able to intelligently defend their opinions.

>>72495848
Fandago has fuck all theory but he can still discuss his opinions on music reasonably well. A bit hand wavy at times, but articulate on the impact music has on him.

>>72495925
>but he can still discuss his opinions on music reasonably well
lol no

>articulate on the impact music has on him.
why on earth would anybody care what impact the music has on him?

>>72495969
Art is only worth its impact on you.

Reminder

>>72495808
If you can write a song, you know music theory to at least a very slight degree. Just in the virtue of experiencing the same psychoacoustic phenomena that everybody else does that makes us hear a V-I progression and think that it sounds nice, you know a little bit of music theory

>>72495993
exactly, so why the actual fuck would anybody care about its impact on Fantano?

File: 1488938175463.png (528KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 1280x720px

>>72495496
I learned music theory not long ago and it did nothing to my taste besides give me an understanding on how the music I like was made on a rule chart

bullshit thread

>>72496008
Uh...because different perspectives are interesting?

>>72496015
How much music theory did you learn

>>72496048
Well would that interest you? You literally just said that all that matters is music's impact on YOU.

>you need to be a chief to enjoy food XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

File: 1380342643230s.jpg (6KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x241px

>that guy who says he "knows music theory"
>turns out he just knows the intervals to make major/minor scales and major/minor triads

yes. I have great taste in music and know very little music theory.

>>72496080
I wasn't that guy. I'm >>72495925
But I think knowing how the music impacts other people can impact how the music impacts on you in an impactful way.

>>72496138
lol that's asinine

File: thfhfghhfthlt.jpg (7KB, 168x94px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 168x94px

reading music is for gay people

>>72495925
fandongo does know music theory, people hate his opinions because they dont know music theory

source: fandingo

Daily reminder that music theory is a set of conventions and tools

it does nothing to your taste

>>72496257
t. grimes and kpop fan

>>72496163
Why are you on a music board if you don't care about what other people think about music? Are you just here to shout your opinions into the void and disagree with people for the sake of your ego or something?
>>72496212
Sauce? I know he knows how to play and consequentially has some basic harmony, but I don't think he has a deep level understanding. He's certainly got some basic terminology like "arpeggios" too, but doesn't get much more technical than that in his reviews.

>>72496062
all of it

>>72496257
>music theory is a set of conventions and tools
Maybe in some respects, but at the bottom line, it's a description of the things we, as humans, find pleasing to hear (or displeasing)

Anyways, It shouldn't dictate your taste, but it helps us understand why we like the things that we do, as a listener at least

>>72496368
m-mozart?

>>72495496
Of course

>>72495925
>articulate on the impact music has on him
I wouldn't consider this to be intelligent defense of his opinions, at least in the sense that isn't technical or specific. He doesn't analyze the music itself. What he does is talk about his experience of listening to it.
Either way, I think that the experience of listening to music is way more valuable than the theory behind why it is good.

>>72496324
>Why are you on a music board if you don't care about what other people think about music?
Believe it or not there are a lot of objective aspects of music that are really interesting to discuss with other people.

Believe it or not, talking about these objective qualities leads to a lot more interesting discussion than "I like it" or "I don't like it," which is what your kind of "discussion" always boils down to.

is there a math equation for music?

>>72495496
>good taste
define "good taste"

Basic knowledge of music will help. Time signature, key, etc.

Although I think music history is more important.

>>72495810
t. hipster in denial

>>72496417
What are you talking about? I've just been defending someone who makes a living out of producing 10 minute videos discussing music.
When I'm not shitposting in threads like this, I discuss my subjective experience by talking about objective aspects of music and I really enjoy hearing other people's perspectives too. Thinking about how other people perceive work enriches my listening and discussing. It's kind of boring and academic without that dimension.

File: SmileSatchmo.jpg (67KB, 280x350px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 280x350px

>>72496586
When did I deny it?

>>72496015
muh nibba

>>72495496
I had better taste in music before I learnt music theory. Now I just overthink every little detail and can't enjoy most music.

>>72496208
all musicians btfo

>>72495496
yeah but it isn't as likely

>but music is subjective
no. this is objectively bad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17O3lL1aUrg
this is objectively good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPlhKP0nZII

if you actually think otherwise then you're a philistine pervertor of the arts

>>72497630
They're not objectively good/bad.
Most people will agree with your analysis, but it's still subjective.
Majority taste doesn't make something objective. "good" can't be measured scientifically, it's a word to describe a subjective perception of somethings worth.

>>72497630
>some art is objectively bad because I say so
YOU are the philistine pervertor of the arts

>>72496627
since birth

>>72496015
Smart trip.

So people who learnt the music theory all love the same albums?

>>72495496
it's actually much harder to have good taste if you understand music theory. with that understanding you'll end up focusing on the technical aspects and its adherence to convention rather than its effect on you or the intent with which it was made. much of the most artistic music is theoretically worthless or mediocre while cookie-cutter pop songs are objectively "good" music
music theory is for making music, not for evaluating art. without some injected depth, music is a craft, not an art

>>72499860
correct