i'm not a critic
i can understand if you were a paid critic
and had to write an article
reviewin' an lp
and you want to give the public an "unbiased" opinion
which i don't believe is possible

you have to have some bias
otherwise, everything made would be dope
but

there are standards to which you compare what you listen to
even if not made in the same vein

because, how can you say
that this was quality, or this is good, but not for me

and that not come across as biased or objective?

sounds like a plea cop, that you just don't
want to hurt any feelings or burn any bridges,
professional or personal

let's discuss

please show me if i'm wrong
i'm open
this is a discussion
not my opinion is better than yours

http://retroflix.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/pdvd_352.jpg?w=640

>i'm not a critic
>i can understand if you were a paid critic
>and had to write an article
>reviewin' an lp
>and you want to give the public an "unbiased" opinion
>which i don't believe is possible
>
>you have to have some bias
>otherwise, everything made would be dope
>but
>
>there are standards to which you compare what you listen to
>even if not made in the same vein
>
>because, how can you say
>that this was quality, or this is good, but not for me
>
>and that not come across as biased or objective?
>
>sounds like a plea cop, that you just don't
>want to hurt any feelings or burn any bridges,
>professional or personal
>
>let's discuss
>
>please show me if i'm wrong
>i'm open
>this is a discussion
>not my opinion is better than yours

i get the impression there's something you want to skewer but are holding back and trying to look at the bigger picture because you figure it will evoke a more fervent response.
but ok, so you are just weighing the merits of "critics" and "objectivity" in "criticism" pro vs. amateur?
doesn't this seem sort of simplistic and passe to you?
i mean people have been asking similar things about "critics" for decades - this is hardly a revolutionary conversation.

people are sayin' be objective
what does that mean?
try to like it?
if it don't fit with your palette, why fuck with it?
cuz you might be missin' out?
well, what if you try it
and you don't like it?
what was gained?
you already knew, suspected you wouldn't
it was a waste
thats why i say, fuck "objectivity"
it don't exist

I feel we don't recognize our own listening biases ENOUGH -- things like how our ears were "shaped". I realized that there is a bit of a common thread in the things I enjoy, and it's because of my "listening bias".

I had a post that I backspaced in this regard that was more in a "Fun Post" vein.

or with an i'ma like it mentality
i HOPE to like everything i hear
after listenin', i make my decision
do i want to play this again right away?
or do i want to discard it

when i first heard mm...i wasn't wowed
steven biko was boring to me
oh my god should have set it off
i couldn't stand award tour
i only really like electric relaxation
and oh my god and lyrics to go
nothin' made me want to dance or bump in the whip
or felt aggressive or hype enough for me
and keep it rollin' was so much of a disappointment
it sounded so muzak

so it got played that once, and i went on to what i was
feelin' more of
snoop, black moon, and wu

they had those hype beats

i just listened to it starting at 10:43 pst today
and it ain't movin' me
it's only on the itunes so as not to break up the discography
but the shit ain't the biz to me

for lack of a better word, 'intense' beats, Midnight Marauders wouldn't work for you.

i just liked (and still listen to it) because the choices of the samples and the sound quality is just 'on the nose'. i can't remember anyone else using African, afro-beat horns like on Steve Biko or that Minnie Ripperton tone on Lyrics to Go. and the drums...don't get me started..

... i think a person can objectively judge things like production quality or the originality of a sample, or the level of skill used by a musician, but as far as emotion received from a song or 'quality', yeah that is subjective.

i think critics try to come (or at least used to. i haven't read any review in a while) from an objective place is that the job of the critic is to serve as a voice or warning of when values within the culture get changed or distorted and can make comments on developing or dying trends.

i guess to a degree the critic is self-serving. they're trying to use their knowledge of an artform or writing style to keep the reading coming back to read more.

i do think that the days of critics being truly objective and looking out for the health of the art is on its last legs if not dead already.

stopped readin' reviews
because i could download and listen for myself
but when you had to buy everything
and wasn't sure
you had to trust somebody else's ears and their taste
now, when the product is easily available
you can trust your own ears and tastes now
fand if you don't like it, you're not really
out any money, so it's not a crapshoot anymore
when lookin' for a dope lp to listen to
now you can download and if it's wack, delete
no money lost!

this shit is getting sad.

i mean u gotta at least f w/ oh my god or somethin

that's it

The level of hate you've put out over the years for that album, you *HAVE* to say none. I'm so fucking disappointed in you. You had me going for all this time. You don't even hate the album, you just hate the people that love it. To think I used to look up to you and now you've turned me into this bitter monster nobody likes anymore. You see what you created block. FUCK YOU!!!!!






________
Big PEMFin H & z's
█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am one thing, a musician." © Miles Davis

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfj3dPkeaqI

and i only like those after years
the only two songs i like initially when the lp dropped
were electric relaxation and oh my god

IMPOSSIBLE!!!!
________
Big PEMFin H & z's
█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am one thing, a musician." © Miles Davis

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

Like Immortal Technique...I see that he has focused content and isn't just talking about bullshit, but it isn't for me. It's not like when I listen to "Bennie Biggle Wiggle" and really say "wait.....what the FUCK do you see good in this????"

Same with a lot of music, really. I can say that something is polished, focused, and recognize that the elements are on point...even if it doesn't move me. On the flipside, it's music that I personally enjoy that I know some folks would hate and even think is garbage...whether it's YG "I like money" or Kstylis "Booty me down."

but whatever nigga, my opinions better than yours anyway.
LOL!!

________
Big PEMFin H & z's
█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am one thing, a musician." © Miles Davis

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

~Austin

"Where in the world is your inspiration to say the things you're aching to say?"

http://austintayeshus.blogspot.com

http://www.last.fm/user/Austintayeshus

http://twitter.com/Austintayeshus

meaning that as long as two people agree on a standard,
we can each prove make our arguments as to whether or not
a piece of art fits the bill for being top notch material.



i mean, let's say i dig stevie wonder.
now ultimately, i don't know WHY i love stevie wonder.
but i can talk about things that stevie wonder does that i like.

vocal range.
ability to emote.
sing-song, catchy melodies,
dense vocal harmonies,

things like that.



and once we agree on our definitions
of what qualifies as quality,
we can argue about whether other similar artists (like donny hathaway, or marvin gaye) do those things better them him.







it's not copping pleas to say that bob dylan is dope,
but i don't fuck with him like that.

because i can recognize that bob dylan makes music
that fits a certain aesthetic, and he's really good at doing what he's trying to do.



but i don't dig that type of music,
so i give a nod to dylan for doing what he does,
but i keep it moving and i don't listen to it in my free time.




your aesthetic is subjective.
it has a lot to do with how your ears were "formed," like dr. claw was saying above.


but once we agree on what the criteria is for quality,
we can be pretty objective about whether or not something fits the bill.





well, some of us can.

there are plenty of folks in the lesson that try to argue
that one aesthetic is "better" than the other.

but that's pretty retarded.




you can't really be objective about what aesthetic you value,
but you can be fairly objective about whether or not an artist is good
at fitting a certain aesthetic.








>i'm not a critic
>i can understand if you were a paid critic
>and had to write an article
>reviewin' an lp
>and you want to give the public an "unbiased" opinion
>which i don't believe is possible
>
>you have to have some bias
>otherwise, everything made would be dope
>but
>
>there are standards to which you compare what you listen to
>even if not made in the same vein
>
>because, how can you say
>that this was quality, or this is good, but not for me
>
>and that not come across as biased or objective?
>
>sounds like a plea cop, that you just don't
>want to hurt any feelings or burn any bridges,
>professional or personal
>
>let's discuss
>
>please show me if i'm wrong
>i'm open
>this is a discussion
>not my opinion is better than yours

i don't know what standards he got
or whatever this quality is
the shit don't interest me
therefore it is wack to me
that's the rule i listen to music by
i have no problem with it
you shouldn't either
and my horizons are broad when it comes to music

I love Stevie Wonder and Bob Dylan equally.

I go through periods where Bob just makes me break down like nobody else and I look at my Stevie albums and think "enh."

Two months later, it's the opposite.

Perceived "genres" suck sometimes.

~Austin

"Where in the world is your inspiration to say the things you're aching to say?"

http://austintayeshus.blogspot.com

http://www.last.fm/user/Austintayeshus

http://twitter.com/Austintayeshus