i am no longer a fan of this band Options

[Alex]

[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 20 2006, 10:29 am' post='23015']
No, but if they ever made songs that you really loved, then you can at least show some respect to them, even if you don't think that the newer albums are as well written as the older.
They ever gave you something that you loved very much, thank them for that, but accept it and let them go if they don't give you what you want anymore.
And let the people who love the newer Live be, and stop telling them that the newer Live sucks, because to for example Beau99, Lien, Rocknerd and me the newer Live doesn't suck at all.
[/quote]

I'll give them respect for their older albums. I won't give them respect for the meaningless last two albums.


[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 20 2006, 10:29 am' post='23015']So then you must understand what Live can mean to people.
No, you don't have to justify yourself, but I would like it if you stop judging me and other people who do like the newer albums and judging Live for making albums you don't like.
[/quote]

Stop judging Live for making albums that I don't like? Er... why? I'm on a message board and I'll 'judge' them all I want. Thank you.



[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 20 2006, 10:29 am' post='23015']But the question of good or bad music depends on what the listener feels about it, I think.
In my opinion Live has made 3 good albums, although there is 1 album which is too painfull to me to listen too (because of bringing back old pain to me) and 4 fantastic albums!
If everybody feels the same about music, then the world gets boring.
What about people who love totally something else like hiphop, r&B, classical music?
Are they all ignorant?
The people that you love, do they all love the first 3 albums of Live?
If they don't: are they all ignorant?[/quote]

Why do you keep bringing this stuff up? You've missed my point, yet again. The quality of music isn't based on your enjoyment of it. I said you were ignorant if you can't appreciate the fact that there is music that is much better written than Lives. You don't have to care for or enjoy this music, but denying its existence is ignorant. Also, on this point about 'hiphop, r&b, classical music'; that's what I was referring to with my statement about approaching music with an open mind. A large number of people here seem to have enjoyment of a relatively specific kind of music, and disregard a lot of other music. For a music fan, I think that's a stupid thing to do, as there is so much music in so many genres to be discovered.



[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 20 2006, 10:29 am' post='23015']It might be that it doesn't make it good to YOU, but it's awesome to me![quote]

I have no problem with you enjoying it, but it's still not 'good'. Please try to grasp this.




[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 20 2006, 10:29 am' post='23015']You can like it if you are open for it, but if you are not, well then it doesn't speak to you.
Can be.
[/quote]

Er... yes. (???)


[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 20 2006, 10:29 am' post='23015']But that doesn't say something about being ignorant or not.
Some music fits better with you because of your background and your character, but that doesn't mean that the music you don't like is per definition bad.
It's bad to you, but good to someone else.
No, its not to me, but you don't have to open your mind for it if you don't want to, or are unable to.
then it just doesn't fit with you.
So, why don't you?
Why do you spend so much time in telling everybody that you don't like the newer albums?
Meanwhile you can listen to the older ones and enjoy them!
Or enjoy the other music that you like even better!
[/quote]

I'm having trouble trying to understand what you're saying. Still, my point remains the same. You might enjoy it, but it doesn't make it good.

I don't spend much time telling people I don't like the newer albums, actually. The posts I do make about it are written because the complete lack of knowledge about music and objectivity displayed by certain people on this forum get to me. Why do you spend so much time replying to these posts? It's the same argument- and a rather redundant one at that.

And on listening to music- yes, 95% of my day I spend listening to, analyzing, and enjoying music in various forms.

[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 20 2006, 10:29 am' post='23015']Did I ever say that?.[/quote]

No, that's why my initial post read [quote]I've seen a few posts about 'opening your mind' lately[/quote]
I wasn't referring to you.


[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 20 2006, 10:29 am' post='23015']But that doesn't mean that you have to work off on that band and on people who do like the albums that you dislike.
Okay, I've worked off on Secret Samadhi myself and I regret that now, because I've hurt people with that.
I let another discussion get out of hand.[/quote]

I don't have to, no. But I want to, so I will contiune to do so. I just want people that enjoy the album to admit that it's not well written.

[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 20 2006, 10:29 am' post='23015']I don't need weetbix, I'm addicted to music, I'm gonna check out Songs Black mountain now.
That album makes me feel so happy!
[/quote]

I'm also addicted to music. I still need my weetbix though. I'm sincerely glad SFBM makes you happy.

One other thing- the way you quoted my post took numerous comments out of context. Next time at least take whole sentences, if not paragraphs... thanks.

[Tabucky]

Learn how to quote, people.

And as usual Alex is hitting it on the head.

[Alex]

Cheers man.

And I have no idea what the hell is up with the Quoting feature on here... it seems to have died.

test

EDIT: it worked.... um... not sure why it didn't before.

This post has been edited by Alex: Nov 19 2006, 11:39 pm

[Tabucky]

Cheers man.

And I have no idea what the hell is up with the Quoting feature on here... it seems to have died.
EDIT: it worked.... um... not sure why it didn't before.

No prob anyway. I think the quoting failure was because gvb screwed up on her end of it. And I've been meaning to ask you, do you have an AIM screen name or anything? Because I'd love to talk to you about music and stuff realtime. Just tell me if you use AIM or another IM service (you can PM me about it).

[FishOutaWater]

By your logic, I suppose in Luke 14:26 Jesus saying that to follow him one would have to hate his father and mother means we should all either take up arms against our parents or at least keep as much distance from them as we can.

I interpret this statement that is attributed to Jesus about hating your father and mother in order to follow Jesus' way as having the SAME point as the one that Ed makes in Operation Spirit and Top and all those other wonderful songs. I also interpret it as similar to Krishnamurti's statements on emptying one's mind of conditioning in order to see clearly.

If you look look at everything that Jesus said and did from a perspective that is different than the usual westernized view, all of Jesus' statements come alove with new, relevant, powerful meaning.

I think that what Jesus meant when he said if any man comes to him and doesn't hate his father and mother and sister and people and his own life, then he cannot be a desciple of Jesus is this: you must strip yourself away of all the teachings that were fed into your head, your conditioning, all those things that you are attached to, and only then can you be truly alone and pure of mind, and only then can you see the things that Jesus speaks of, the light of true love.

Luke 26:33 goes on to se "so whoever he be of you who not forsaketh not all he hath cannot be my desciple."

Does Jesus literally call his follers to hate their family and their people and their life and forsake everything they have? No, of course not. These are metaphors and meanings somewhat lost in translation. I think Jesus is talking about emptying one's mind and of non-attachment to things.

These are exactly the kind passages that I think are the most accurate representation of what Jesus said and did. The parable of the good Samaritan, the prodigal son, the sermon on the mount, the statement that one must be like a little child to get into heaven, the statement that it is more likely for a camel to get thorough the eye of a needle than for a rich person to get into heaven. These are all probably attributable to Jesus and when read through the lens of open spirituality, can be seen as a message of purely love, compassion, forgiveness, and practicing mindfullness and non-attachement. And this is the same thing taught by the Buddha. The rest of the story about salvation and the devil were added on centuries later and seem to be the sole thing that evangelicals have latched onto.

[GvB]

I'll give them respect for their older albums. I won't give them respect for the meaningless last two albums.

Stop judging Live for making albums that I don't like? Er... why? I'm on a message board and I'll 'judge' them all I want. Thank you.

Why do you keep bringing this stuff up? You've missed my point, yet again. The quality of music isn't based on your enjoyment of it. I said you were ignorant if you can't appreciate the fact that there is music that is much better written than Lives. You don't have to care for or enjoy this music, but denying its existence is ignorant. Also, on this point about 'hiphop, r&b, classical music'; that's what I was referring to with my statement about approaching music with an open mind. A large number of people here seem to have enjoyment of a relatively specific kind of music, and disregard a lot of other music. For a music fan, I think that's a stupid thing to do, as there is so much music in so many genres to be discovered.


Er... yes. (???)
I'm having trouble trying to understand what you're saying. Still, my point remains the same. You might enjoy it, but it doesn't make it good.

I don't spend much time telling people I don't like the newer albums, actually. The posts I do make about it are written because the complete lack of knowledge about music and objectivity displayed by certain people on this forum get to me. Why do you spend so much time replying to these posts? It's the same argument- and a rather redundant one at that.

And on listening to music- yes, 95% of my day I spend listening to, analyzing, and enjoying music in various forms.
No, that's why my initial post read
I wasn't referring to you.
I don't have to, no. But I want to, so I will contiune to do so. I just want people that enjoy the album to admit that it's not well written.
I'm also addicted to music. I still need my weetbix though. I'm sincerely glad SFBM makes you happy.

One other thing- the way you quoted my post took numerous comments out of context. Next time at least take whole sentences, if not paragraphs... thanks.

We have totally different opinions on well written, that's okay with me.
For the record, I maybe did'nt take the whole thing to quote, but I have read it, don't worry.

I'll tell you what I see as well written: I hardly analize the guitarrifs and rythms.
I can read music notes, and hear when it goes false, but that's all.

I'm more an emotional and spiritual listener, a song can make me feel much better when I feel down or motivate me to do something for the world or for just one other person or can finally make something clear to me and working things out.
Otherwise I have to bother my friends too often with what's all weighing on my mind, and that would make me feel very sorry for them anyway!
And I have a weakness for songs which are in one way sad, but at the other hand hopefull.
And one simple lyric or the words in one verse or the chorus of a song can do that to me.
Such a song can get a sort of sacret or at least very valuable to me, and it hurts me if someone goes on about well written, to me it is, because it helps me.

And feeling supported emotionally is in my opinion not less worth than someone who is analyzing the songs technically.
What I hear when I hear the older albums of Live, is music and lyrics made by people who are unhappy and struggling with things, people who are angry and sad.
And on Secret Samadhi most songs sound even scared to me.
I can't feel supported by them when I need to, but if you can get out of it what you want or need, that's fine with me.
The songs of SS make me even go back in time when I felt sad, angry, anxious and hopeless.

Why do the later albums sounds different?
I think they sound lighter and sweeter, because they are happier and about finally finding a destination and love and a raw and angry sound just doesn't fit with that.
And when I listen Songs From Black Mountain then I hear a very special kind of warmth in the songs and a happiness of people who are finally really happy.
I think it's not standard and poppy, it's the REAL happy sound to me.
People here say quiet often that a lot of songs by other artists are already about love.
But there are not that much people who can sing so convincing and so vulnerable about real love like Ed, I think.

And if I hear Ed singing on BoP or SFBM, I have the feeling that I hear someone who is finally happy after some very, very, very, hard times but still doesn't forget the rest of the world and who has figured out that we can only make this world better if we put all the love that we have in it by doing good things to ourselves each other and the nature.
And that's not an easy message, like other people may think here.
but to me it's a beautiful one.

I hope that going back to the angry sound (mentioned in another topic) doesn't mean that there have happened currently bad things to Ed or other Live members and that it's a kind of rock everybody here loves.

GvB.

[GvB]

Alex: I put it for short for you, in a question.

Were you ever all of a sudden touched by a song, in a deeper way than just enjoying it, without analizing it?

GvB.

This post has been edited by GvB: Nov 21 2006, 7:03 am

[Alex]

Yes. Many times. Mostly classical music. Or prog. And Jeff Buckley. Radiohead... Actually, lots of things give me those chills... moments when time ceases and all there is is the music. Not ALL of these pieces were well written.

I'll say it one last time:
The quality of music isn't based on your enjoyment of it.

I keep telling you that I enjoy not so well written music too, but in the case of SFBM and BOP, it's so badly written and cheesy that it does nothing for me at all. To be honest, I think it has absolutely nothing going for it.

And by the way, I'm sorry to say, but if you have limited musical knowledge then why do you think you are qualified to state what you think is well written? (Just talking musically here, not about lyrics).

[WaiterAtCliftons]

Ok

I am a Christian. Now I only read up to about page 4 so sorry if I repeat anything anyone else has said.

Gorgitz (I think that's what your name was)

You are making all Christians look really really bad with your narrow view on all other cultures and life. It's fine to follow the faith you believe in and even be what a lot of people would call a "Jesus Freak". I'm one. But I don't go on any boards preaching to people about why they shouldn't listen to a certain band. ESPECIALLY this band. Now if you are on a Rob Zombie or Marylin Manson board maybe I could understand your decesion not to follow a band like that anymore.

What I get out of Live is a lot of positive messages. If you follow Christian Rock at all you will understand that most Christian rock is positive messages not bands quoting Jesus, God, and the Bible all the time. Now Live isn't a Christian band far from it actually But they relay the same kind of messages that Live sends out about Peace, Love, and Oneness.

Also being a Christian does not mean you have to shut yourself off from society. Do you watch rated R movies or even PG-13? Do you not watch some of the most popular shows on TV? Do you not read any book that doesn't completely just shout Christianity out to you the entire time. Check out this site www.christianrock.net they actually have a "Secular" music discussion that Christians just like you and myself discuss bands such as Live, and all kinds of other bands from System of a Down to John Mayer. It's not a sin to listen to music like this. You won't go to hell for it.

As a Christian I don't exactly like the lyrics in "Operation Spirit" but I at the same time can also see where Ed was coming from back then. BECAUSE I was in the same shoes. I didn't know Jesus but I knew he was a great and powerful person. But what he was back then did mean nothing to me until I completely understood him. And I don't believe that Ed was saying anything positive about Jesus in that song. Because he has since changed the lyric to "What a man was 2000 years ago means everything to me today" So even Ed himself realized it was very Jesus friendly.

I do believe Ed Loves Christ....now I don't know if he will get into Heaven because I do know he dips into a lot of other types of Spirituality. And there is only one God and he is a Jealous one as it states in the bible. So I doubt Ed would make it into Heaven altough I'd love to see him there. But what I'm trying to say is Ed loves what Christ teaches...Peace, Love, and Oneness. Just like Buddah. Whats so wrong with what Buddah taught? You can love Christ and be a devout Christian and still Love and enjoy the teachings of Buddah. You just can't have more than one faith. I don't. But I still understand the message the Buddah puts out there for us. I even have a lil Buddah statue in my bedroom.

Anyway I'm blabering at this point and probably make no sense whatsoever.

I'm a very devout Christian who loves this band and don't wanna push my beliefs on anyone else. You believe what you want. I'll believe what I want. Just don't hate me for who I am and I won't do the same to you.

Godbless

[GvB]

I'll say it one last time:
The quality of music isn't based on your enjoyment of it.

To me it is (and I say that for the last time too) and it is often even much more than just enjoyment it's beyond chills, the quality of music to me is if it can give me emotional support or make my whole day good.
By the way: this afternoon I talked about it to someone who has studied piano at the Music Academy, and she agreed with ME.
She said: "The only things that are not subjective are the style, the rythm and the notation, all the rest is subjective, because music is art and what you see as good art is subjective and BELONGS TO EVERYBODY. Because music is a matter of the heart."

Okay I really let you do with it what you want, I bless you for belonging to the "elite", maybe they should make a special area for people like you, were you can discuss on your "level".

GvB.

[Alex]

To me it is (and I say that for the last time too)

But you're blatantly wrong.

The only things that are not subjective are the style, the rythm and the notation

Define style. Rhythm, I'll agree, is an integral part of the criteria I would use to analyze and judge a song. So that's arguing for my point, and against yours. Notation is obviously nothing to do with the kind of music (as in pop rock) that you're talking about, as I'm assuming Live don't notate their songs.

If rhythm and style are objectional factors, then surely melody, timbre, and dynamics are also part of this. ALL of these factors do hover between lines in terms of good writing or personal enjoyment- good melodies, to some, aren't good to others. I've never denied this. The same can be applied to dynamics, timbre, rhythm etc. But these elements can, to varying degrees, be judged objectively. Can you accept that???

... and it is often even much more than just enjoyment it's beyond chills, the quality of music to me is if it can give me emotional support or make my whole day good.

You called me 'elitist' but you made a comment like this which clearly insinuates that my enjoyment of music is of a lesser degree than yours; you seem to be implying that with my analysis, and approach of listening to music I don't have the same understanding of the 'transcendental' qualities some music can possess.

Obviously you don't have any basis for this statement, so I'll clear it up by saying that music is almost completely my entire life. If I hadn't discovered music at an early age, I would be an entirely different person now, as the choices and paths I've taken with it have been with me through growing up. My life is mostly centered around music, and I enjoy music immensly. Actually, words can't describe feelings I get when listening to music. You said there was enjoyment beyond getting 'chills' for music. Maybe, for you, there is. But you certainly can't say you enjoy it any more than I do, you just have a different measure of how your body reacts to sound. Also, so you know, I certainly don't listen to music for the first time with the process I do after giving music a good subjective chance. I like to experience music through many mediums, in many places, and it's only after I've decided whether I personally like the music or not that I'll consider it's objective quality. Even then, I don't do it often.

I just hate the thought that people on here actually think SFBM is objectively good. It's obviously not.

[serene23]

If you cannot admit you might possibly be wrong who is going to take you seriously?

Jesus never existed. I might be wrong though.

Wait, Live isn't a Christian Rock Band...never was...this topic confuses me. DId you think they were a Christian Rock Band?

I am glad I am not religious, I would lose out on so many of the things that I enjoy.

[GvB]

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']
But you're blatantly wrong.
Define style. Rhythm, I'll agree, is an integral part of the criteria I would use to analyze and judge a song. So that's arguing for my point, and against yours. Notation is obviously nothing to do with the kind of music (as in pop rock) that you're talking about, as I'm assuming Live don't notate their songs.[/quote]

But someone who is able to write the notation down, can, by playing the piano, for example figure out which tones Ed sings and the accords of the guitars and so on.

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']
If rhythm and style are objectional factors, then surely melody, timbre, and dynamics are also part of this. ALL of these factors do hover between lines in terms of good writing or personal enjoyment- good melodies, to some, aren't good to others. I've never denied this.[/quote]

You did, by talking about "well written" all the time and all the parts exept for the emotion are all at least composed and written and you can have different opinions on if that has happened well so I think "well written" is subjective.

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']
The same can be applied to dynamics, timbre, rhythm etc. But these elements can, to varying degrees, be judged objectively. Can you accept that??? [/quote]

(See, there you go again).

No, because of the personal enjoyment of a person and the emotions which are beyond that (being seriously moved, feeling better or even healed inside) is subjective.
And I never meant to say that I'm beyond you in that, I only say that I can feel something which is more worth TO ME than enjoyment itself.

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']
You called me 'elitist' but you made a comment like this which clearly insinuates that my enjoyment of music is of a lesser degree than yours; you seem to be implying that with my analysis, and approach of listening to music I don't have the same understanding of the 'transcendental' qualities some music can possess. [/quote]

No, your approach is DIFFERENT from mine, and I just dont like it if people try to tell me what music IS good or bad (written or performed), I decide my own opinion about that.

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']
so I'll clear it up by saying that music is almost completely my entire life.
If I hadn't discovered music at an early age, I would be an entirely different person now, as the choices and paths I've taken with it have been with me through growing up. My life is mostly centered around music, and I enjoy music immensly. [/quote]

Same counts for me and I don't know if you can, but I can find comfort, support, confirmation a release of negative emotions and the strenght to be more optimistic than I otherwise would be in it and I can't find the words for how that really feels either.
I can get chills from it too and a song that really touches me can even make me cry or really make me smile.

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']
Actually, words can't describe feelings I get when listening to music. You said there was enjoyment beyond getting 'chills' for music. Maybe, for you, there is. [/quote]

Yes, a good melody with a fantastic (in my opinion) singer, who gives me the feeling that he/she believes in or even feels what he/she sings (It feels to me as if Ed feels what he sings and his voice can change the way I feel too and even make me making my mind up about spiritual things and it's not only the lyrics, it's the way he sings it in combination of the sound of the instruments. Britney, who is brought up too often in this forum already, doesn't do that to me. I don't believe that she really feels what she sings), and lyrics and the melody and the sound of the instruments that help me to cheer up or making up my mind about spiritual and emotional things and work them out.

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']
But you certainly can't say you enjoy it any more than I do,[/quote]
No and I never would really mean to say that.

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']you just have a different measure of how your body reacts to sound. [/quote]

And I think that how my soul reacts to it is to me most important, and that can cause a chills and tears all of a sudden.

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']
Also, so you know, I certainly don't listen to music for the first time with the process I do after giving music a good subjective chance. I like to experience music through many mediums, in many places, and it's only after I've decided whether I personally like the music or not that I'll consider it's objective quality. Even then, I don't do it often. [/quote]

That's the difference, I listen most to the singer (I admit I know most about singing and melody about music), what the singer sings, tones (I love it when it goes from very low to very high and back, Ed is good in that in my opinion) and sometimes from slow to faster and from faster to slower and the mood in the singers voice and if the music fits with that (I love it if there is a guitar or piano or both involved and the sound of that has to fit with the lyrics, in my opinion).

[quote name='Alex' date='Nov 22 2006, 2:09 am' post='23176']
I just hate the thought that people on here actually think SFBM is objectively good. It's obviously not. [/quote]

It is SUBJECTIVELY good to me and SUBJECTIVELY bad to you and I say that all the time that "good music" is SUBJECTIVE, because everybody wants something else to hear.
And I'm sick of people calling it objective and I never did that and I never will (if you think I did, then I want evidence).

By the way, the quoting thing doesn't work again.

GvB.

This post has been edited by GvB: Nov 23 2006, 2:28 pm

[Alex]

[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 24 2006, 5:53 am' post='23229']
But someone who is able to write the notation down can, by playing the piano, for example figure out which tones Ed sings.[/quote]

I don't need to 'notate' any music to know what notes are being played or sung- I have perfect pitch. So basically you were, in your original post, talking about melody.

[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 24 2006, 5:53 am' post='23229']You do, by calling it objective..[/quote]

No, I dont. For example, someone could like a vocal melody that is written badly- like a poprock song that had notes that unintentionally clashed with other instruments. The fact that someone likes it doesn't make it good.


[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 24 2006, 5:53 am' post='23229']No, because of the personal enjoyment of a person and the emotions which are beyond that (being moved by a song with a certain dynamic, timbre, rythm and the instruments being used for the song the lyrics and in my opinion the most important, the voice of the singer and the way he/she sings it, or totally hating it and everything in between) is subjective.[/quote]

To be honest, it's kinda hard for me to understand what you're saying...


[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 24 2006, 5:53 am' post='23229']No, your approach is different from mine, and I just dont like it if people try to tell me what music IS good or bad.[/quote]

You don't seem capable of making the decision yourself.



[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 24 2006, 5:53 am' post='23229']Same counts for me.
Yes, a good melody with a fantastic (in my opinion) singer, who gives me the feeling that he/she believes in or even feels what he/she sings (It feels to me as if Ed feels what he sings. Britney, who is brought up too often here already, doesn't), and lyrics that help me to cheer up or making up my mind on something difficult
That's the difference, I listen most to the singer (I admit I know most about singing and melody about music), what the singer sings, tones (I love it when it goes from very low to very high and back, Ed is good in that in my opinion) and sometimes from slow to faster and from faster to slower and the mood in the singers voice and if the music fits with that (I love it if there is a guitar or piano or both involved)..[/quote]

See, the fact that you listen to vocals the most, and place them above other aspects of music shows our differences in approach to music. What other bands/artists/composers do you like?


[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 24 2006, 5:53 am' post='23229']It is SUBJECTIVELY good to me and I say that all the time that "good music" is SUBJECTIVE, because everybody wants something else to hear.
And I'm sick of people calling it objective.[/quote]

YOU CAN LIKE IT ALL YOU WANT. I said before that music does have subjective qualites, but the point is, SFBM is not well written.

[quote name='GvB' date='Nov 24 2006, 5:53 am' post='23229']By the way, the quoting thing doesn't work again.[/quote]

It gets quite hard to read posts when the quote function doesn't work properly, doesn't it...

[GvB]

I don't need to 'notate' any music to know what notes are being played or sung- I have perfect pitch. So basically you were, in your original post, talking about melody.

And accords.

No, I dont. For example, someone could like a vocal melody that is written badly- like a poprock song that had notes that unintentionally clashed with other instruments. The fact that someone likes it doesn't make it good.

That unintentially clashing can happen out of emotion (for example out of sadness or anger or enthousiasm), okay it's maybe not meant on that moment to be like that and that emotion is of course not written, but it can be so pure and real that that is the good thing about it to some listeners.

To be honest, it's kinda hard for me to understand what you're saying...
You don't seem capable of making the decision yourself.

I can decide by myself, that I don't agree with you after all these posts, proves that.
I guess that you prefer the tention in the undertones of the instruments (for example the low tones of a (bass)guitar, the lowest tones in a piano, a heavy beating drumrythm, the sound of a cello), because that is what can be felt in your body, I know that, but that's not what I prefer.
I prever to hear the subject and the emotion of the lyrics back in the melody and the feeling that the singer puts in the melody and a sound of music that fits with all that.
That counts for me for poprock and rock as well the fullband as acoustic versions (although I prever often the acoustic versions above the fullband versions, but I also like to listen to soft instrumental classical music and celtic music and then is the melody most important to me and I like a capella, soulballads and a few gospels.
And I like fusions between different styles (like Queen often did).

And a very important thing to me is that a melody of a song wether it's sung or played with an instrument can make me sing along or whistle along, but the way it's performed helps with that too.
You can come up with that you can sing along with every melody, thats right, but a melody itself and the way it's played and sung can make me sing or whitle along spontaniously and make me feel happy, when it's a happy song, sad, when it's a sad song, angry, when it's an angry song.
The way a melody is composed, can tell me a lot of the emotion in a song, but if the way it's performed and if it doesn't fit with the lyrics (if there are) or the accompaniment don't fit with it, then the whole song is screwed up according to me.
And a song can also be bad according to me if it's too angry, too sad without hope or too scary to me.
But that's the way I feel about it.
I told you before that I have a lot experience with melody.
That is because I have the experience of singing in a choir and I played recorder before, but quit doing that because of being too busy with other things.
The conduct of the choir makes very much effort to let me and the other members "feel" the melody and the miscal accompaniment and to teach us to reply on that with, singing it in a dynamic way (softer, louder, the high tones high enough, the lower tones low enough) and to tell us why a melody goes higher or lower on certain moments in a song and why to sing some words and lines louder or softer.
I have to admit that I not always agree with her interpretation and when to sing softer or louder, but I know that dynamics work in singing and playing melodies.
And Ed sings in a beautiful dynamic way, in my opinion and does that in my opinion better from TDTH an up than before TDTH, he does more with high and low and a little softer and a little louder and the musical accompaniment fits with that in my opinion, but the musical accompaniment already fit in the older songs, because the older songs where louder and more angry, so sounded Ed, in the older albums the difference between soft and loud is more in almost whispering and (almost) screaming, but I like that not as much as the dynamics in higher and lower singing and a little softer and a little louder singing in the newer albums.
And the musical accompaniment fits with that in my opinion.

And what also counts for me that the notes don't have to be sounding perfect, as long as I can feel in my soul where the song is about and if my feeling tells me that it is good emotionally, to me.
Then my physical reactions (chills, lump in my throat, tears, or a warm feeling and starting to smile) follow automaticly.

See, the fact that you listen to vocals the most, and place them above other aspects of music shows our differences in approach to music. What other bands/artists/composers do you like?

Pop/rock:
Queen, Bon Jovi, Coldplay, U2, (okay, Bono is not such a good singer technically, but he has a emotional way of singing that I like), Skunk Anansi (and Skin's solo work), Era (very soft celtic music) and a few other bands from The Netherlands and Belgium that make softrock and popballads.
And I like Cyndi Lauper, Phill Collins and Lenny Kravitz (Lenny Kravitz doesn't sing technicaly good, but has emotion in his voice and I can even appreciate his way of screaming, same counts for Jon Bon Jovi).

Classical: Vivaldi and Bach and sometimes Verdi.

And also a few soul songs like "End of the road" by Boyz II men, and "Think" by Aretha Franklin and "If I ever fall in love"by Shai.
And a few reggae songs by Bob Marley ("Redemption Song", for example).
And gospel/spirituals like: "Shine, Jesus shine" and "The last Supper".

YOU CAN LIKE IT ALL YOU WANT. I said before that music does have subjective qualites, but the point is, SFBM is not well written.

Songs From Black Mountain is TO YOU not well written, because I guess you always like a wall of sound (I guess you can appreciate Queen too?).
And I can appreciate wall of sounds too but I like acoustic too, a very thin and light kind of music with the emotion in the voice of the singer because of the words in the lyrics and the warm sound of an acoustic guitar or a piano maybe even a recorder or flute.

I love the semi-acoustic (not totally acoustic, I know, there is for example an electric guitar involved sometimes) sound of Songs From Black Mountain, the lyrics are most of all full of love, happiness, hope and sometimes a little sadness, and a light way of singing and a thin and light sound of music belong in my opinion to that feelings, and that's why it is well written in my opinion.
I think that walls of sound with for example low sounding guitars and basses, belong more to al lot of anger and personally I mostly don't like to feel so much anger.
But when I'm really angry, then I turn up Metallica, but being that angry happens about once in half a year.
And further I like the kinds of music I discribed earlier in this post.

But I'll never really mean to say loud that there is something bad about a song or a piece of music generally or that a song is bad generally, a song or a piece of music is good or bad in my opinion.

Because maybe someone else has a reason to love it from the bottom of his or her heart, and then I'll hurt that person maybe really badly.

It might be difficult for you to understand what I mean, but keep in mind that it is harder for me to express myself in English, because I'm Dutch and English isn't my natural language and there are things in music that can hardly or even not be captured in words.

GvB.

This post has been edited by GvB: Nov 25 2006, 4:17 pm