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