Is some music better than other music?, A vexed question. Options

[wakibaki]

The question is exactly as posed in the thread title. Is some music better than other music?

For myself, I have long been convinced that some music is indeed better than other music. That all music can be ranked on a scale of 'goodness', given that no piece is necessarily of consistent quality from end-to-end.

For example, I might sing a song. I might sing it slightly out of tune in a particular passage. I might sing it again, without singing out of tune.

All other things being equal, I would rate the second rendition better than the first.

I think this applies across the board, that there is an intrinsic quality in music (or: are qualities) which make(s) it possible to say that one piece is better than another.

I know that not everybody agrees with this, some holding that there is no intrinsic quality in either piece, and that the differences are all to do with my perceptions, but I don't feel that this is adequate to explain the cultivation of musical expression and appreciation. I only got the perceptions by comparing good with worse.

Once, in the course of trying to teach a particularly obtuse guitar student, I was confronted with a somewhat existential position. 'You make a sound, I make a sound', I paraphrase his contribution, 'They're both sounds, there's nothing to make the sound you make any more valid than the sound I make.' He never did turn out much of a guitarist, but then maybe if I had been a better teacher I would have had a better answer than to burn him with a cigarette.

Despite that, I understand how some might find it offensive to be told that the music they like is intrinsically inferior to some other music. It could be seen as preferable to put it all down to personal preferences rather than risk confrontation.

I don't see anybody here backing away from a confrontation though. So, is some music better than other music?

[Canar]

Is some music better than other music? The answer is "yes". I can clearly ABX different works against each other, and one of them is almost always inferior in quality.

[wakibaki]

Is some music better than other music? The answer is "yes". I can clearly ABX different works against each other, and one of them is almost always inferior in quality.

OK, well I'm not sure how you ABX different works against on another, but I like the definite expression 'one of them is almost always inferior in quality'. This certainly chimes with the way I feel.

When recording artists are working in the studio, they make this kind of judgement all the time. They (may) record a piece many times and discard all but one 'take'. They may even patch a section from one take into an other. They obviously don't pick the one that is 'worst', they pick the one that is 'best', and my guess is that if their judgement were presented to a panel of external judges (maybe even the whole world, for the sake of argument), their (the recording artists) judgement would be in accord with that of the wider panel.

Further than that, I don't see this as an issue of taste, because it think that the judgement is invariant with time, at least future time. I don't think that a future population would be moved to overturn the judgement. Thinking about the even tempered scale, it replaced the ill-tempered scale because it is 'better', and there is no general inclination to abandon it and turn back the clock.

This is all very well where we are considering multiple performances of the same piece, but it becomes very much more difficult when you want to put up, e.g a piece of classical against a piece of country music. There are complications arising from the quality of lyrics too. Nevertheless, I am inclined to extend the principle to all music, even if I wouldn't relish the task of ranking Bob Dylan's 'Idiot Wind' against Astrud Gilberto's 'Girl from Ipanema' (Antônio Carlos Jobim) although I think both would outrank Lou Reed's 'Perfect Day'.

w

[dhromed]

OK, well I'm not sure how you ABX different works against on another, but I like the definite expression 'one of them is almost always inferior in quality'. This certainly chimes with the way I feel.

Pick two random songs. Can you ABX them? Of course you can. Will one be better? Well, they're different, so the answer is Yes.

if their judgement were presented to a panel of external judges (maybe even the whole world, for the sake of argument), their (the recording artists) judgement would be in accord with that of the wider panel.

There is no basis for this feeling other than your preconception that such a thing might be. The panel might easily favour another take, or vote to scrap all takes and tell the artist to start over. Or burn his instruments and start a promising career flipping burgers.

Further than that, I don't see this as an issue of taste, because it think that the judgement is invariant with time, at least future time. I don't think that a future population would be moved to overturn the judgement.

It seems to me you're not actually looking for answers or analysis here; just confirmation of your opinions.

That said, I sympathise with you trying to teach a student who was unwilling to learn. An instrument has specific possbilities and is constructed according to certain rules and requires certain techniques to be played successfully. That must be learned and understood without balderdash like "music is subjective, dude". Musical freedom is not carte blanche to ignore the history of an instrument or music in general.

I wouldn't relish the task of ranking Bob Dylan's 'Idiot Wind' against Astrud Gilberto's 'Girl from Ipanema' (Antônio Carlos Jobim) although I think both would outrank Lou Reed's 'Perfect Day'.

I disagree. I think most of Bob Dylan's work is junk and I really like Perfect Day. I don't think I've heard 'Girl from Ipanema' so I can't say much about that.

This post has been edited by dhromed: Apr 13 2012, 10:14