When does one stop being a music fan and becomes a music snob?

I rapidly oscillate between both so at any given time I can claim to be either

I wouldn't worry about it too much, there are people who's jobs it is to worry about it

>>73578904
there's a difference ?

>>73578929
I think one is more obnoxious than the other

at the conclusion of successively listening to miles davis, john coltrane, and charles mingus

>>73578904
It's relative to how obnoxious you are about your particular tastes. It's one thing to be obsessed about one artist or genre, it's another thing to act like a dick when someone else disagrees or has different preferences.
One sign is the typical comment,
> grew out of that when I was 14

when they start browsing /mu/

File: 1497214005214.jpg (43KB, 454x700px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 454x700px

>>73578904
When you start pushing your views on others. When you start telling other people why whatever genre/band/artist/ect. is inferior to *blank* and making an honest attempt to convince them to change their preferences.

Basically when you believe there's a right and wrong kind of music to listen to or a right or wrong way to listen to it because you'll immediately start to think less of people who enjoy something you don't as though they've made some sort of moral mistake or have broken the social contract. Just enjoy the music you enjoy, respect people who enjoy something you don't just as much as you respect people who like what you like.

If your respect of an other person is predicated on the kind of sounds they like to hear, you're a goofball and should volunteer yourself to sciences' attempt to cure autism.

>>73579341
This,
very this.

>>73579341
Buy don't you think objectively some music is better than other music?
Like wouldn't you agree that someone who thinks that Paris Hilton is a better musician than Bob Dylan, is wrong?

File: 1496988477463.jpg (12KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 400x400px

>>73580148
I think there's a balance between objective merit and relative merit in all art. You can't declare anything art, unless you're a post-modernist. That means there has to be some standards. But at the same time I think those standards are subject to every individual's own personality, experiences, and innate tastes, if there is such a thing.

I think of it as something similar to the argument between moral relativists and moral absolutists. It only seems reasonable that there's a balance between the two that is ideal. Where that balance is though is probably something we won't figure out in the next millennia let alone our own lifetimes.

So sure, some music is better than other music and you can probably make an objective case for it too. But at a certain point objective truth isn't enough to explain it all so some room must be made for relativity in taste and subjective whim. How much objectivity versus subjectivity is the real question.

What I know for sure is that if you just pick one or the other and not give any ground most people, even those on the fence of the argument, are gonna think you're a cunt and not want to talk to you about music and perhaps art and philosophy and perhaps about anything else for that matter.

>>73580338
>You can't declare anything art, unless you're a post-modernist.
Meant that as: you can't declare ANYTHING art. As in you can't go and just declare everything and anything is art because there are no standards, unless of course you're a post-modernist. Because there are standards as far as I can tell and I think most people would agree.

>>73578904
>posts a picture of me and the kids at school
how the?

>>73578904
When you start disliking more than half of all music you hear.

>>73578904
- When you dislike everything.
- When it becomes the sole definition of who you are as a person.
- When you begin to treat people differently solely based on what they listen to.

File: 4567890.jpg (50KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 640x640px

When you start thinking musical opinion is objective instead of subjective.

>>73579099
>mingus
>coltrane
>davis
>"snobbish"
more like at the conclusion of listening to prejazz

>>73579341
the thing with this is that music very much depends on the environment, like you cant play bach at a party
but bach is very beautiful. Party music often doesnt have much to it because you wanna just move around
and have a good time. SO when someone comes to me and says that my jazz is boring or shitty then I
can go off about how their Migos or lil uzi sucks even though I enjoy both artists at certain times. I believe music can have a quality to it but it takes a lot of close observation.

>>73578904
When you're posting at 3 posts a minute on /mu/

>>73579099
My plebeian grandparents would listen to Miles Davis when he'd perform at strip-clubs.

File: AnneFrankSchoolPhoto.jpg (139KB, 800x1288px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 800x1288px

>>73578904
When you actively try to subvert the memes

File: 1465158707348.png (135KB, 676x673px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 676x673px

>>73579341
Deep down us snobs just want to get people to stop listening to shit, it's mostly altruistic.
You sound like you don't like getting bullied for liking arctic monkeys.

File: 1442978694245.jpg (700KB, 2301x1834px) Image search: [Google]

700KB, 2301x1834px

>>73579341
>>73580148
>>73580338
Every
Fucking
Summer
Permutations of this conversation plays out daily...

>>73583828
>arctic monkeys
Who? Sounds like you're projecting. I'm a therapist, you know. You can pay me a hundred dollars an hour and I can listen to the boring bullshit that made you become a mungo.