• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Subjectiveness and Music

Schattenjäger

Schattenjäger

Gabriel Knight
When critics rate movies, they rate them on a number of things... plot, dialogue, acting, directing; etc - all tangible items
I can tell the difference between a shit movie (Transformers) and a quality movie (There Will Be Blood)

However, I have issue when critics apply the same type of ratings to music
Rolling Stones top 100 list for example
For me, music is something you either like or not and it's much more subjective than movies

Does anyone else feel like music shouldn't be rated the same way movies and tv are rated?

To critics, A Day in the Life is the best Beatles song.. but what makes it the greatest? Or Tool's Aenima album vs Lateralus .. I found Lateralus to be the better album

Bottom line - music is too subjective to be rated on a scale like other forms of entertainment
 
W

WaffleTaco

Wants to outlaw technological innovation.
Well there is a reason there are less music reviews than movies or games...maybe even books. Album reviews are lucky to get 30 at most on metacritic. I largely agree with you OP.
 
S

Sane_Man

Member
It's all largely subjective, whether it's music, movies, books or games. Certain qualities can be measured but it really comes down to taste. At the end of the day it's all opinion and critics are sharing their opinions.

When they say A Day in the Life is the best Beatles song they're saying it's their favourite Beatles song.
 
L

lazygecko

Member
There are plenty of things you can critique and analyze in music with objective foundations you can derive subjective opinions from, just like in film. The problem is that mainstream music critique is a fucking embarrasment compared to film, including Rolling Stone. It's often like they go out of their way to talk about anything but the music. At most they'll maybe give some lip service to the production values and most basic songwriting components.

For some reason the music press has pretty much no faith in their reader base being capable of understanding things like structure, theory, performance, mixing, etc. on the same level the average film critic brings up things like cinematography, writing, etc.
 
P

PillarEN

Member
I don't mind music being rated. It's just that the ratings in music mean the least to me of all entertainment arts. Like one person might love an album and the other might hate it. But with videogames there is more universality to what makes us give games the ok or the thumbs down. But with music we are so incredibly far apart as to what makes certain music work or not.
 
Master Of Illusion

Master Of Illusion

Member
The main difference is there's a few hundred films released per year with set storytelling styles everyone has come in contact with at some point VS. Thousands of albums released per year in a plethora of genres the majority of people will never listen to because their taste is set with a few specific styles; thus creating a greater fog over said "critique."
 
S

SeanC

Member
You can look at what a song or piece is doing and the elements that put it together. So critics and analysts can draw on that to go into what is working on it and what isn't. Same as a producer in a studio will listen to a track over and over again as they put pieces together. (Needs more cowbell).

You don't want to just go by one person, though. That's why a community of critics, and people who's opinions you trust, are important. That's how you get consensus. The Mummy is a shit movie not just because one guy says so, but a whole lotta people say so.

If you're going just by "how it makes you feel" then yeah, music and comedy are probably the two most subjective art forms out there even when all art is subjective. I don't listen much to the critics on those two things because they rely more heavily on an immediate emotional response and within such a small time than anything else. Critics try to take a step away from that, though, when they're reviewing something. It's not complete objectivity, that' doesn't exist, but they draw on their knowledge of the form to relay that knowledge to the audience and you either listen or you don't.
 
T

takoyaki

Member
I love watching movies, playing games and listening to music.

I read reviews for movies and games but never cared about music reviews.

Pretty much agree with you OP, music seems like the most subjective art-form/medium out of the three and reviews don't serve much of a purpose since anyone can listen to the whole album for free via Spotify/Apple Music/etc. and form their own opinion.

Maybe for taste-making, technical stuff like mixing, how a band performs live vs. the studio album or directly comparing the new album to the quality of the previous work of a band, but even that stuff seems more subjective imo.
 
P

proto

Member
Schattenjäger;241565461 said:
Bottom line - music is too subjective to be rated on a scale like other forms of entertainment
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree with the bottom line, but I definitely agree that there is a lot more subjectivity involved when critiquing music compared to film and tv.

John Kowalski said:
Truth is this simply isn't the case. There are tons of formal aspects to music and they are just as receptive to critical scrutiny. Fuck i mean film is more abstract than music in that kind of way. Not that i'm very fluent in this kind of thing unfortunately...[/URL]
Click to expand...

Definitely don't agree with the bolded statement. A songs technicality has very little to do with its overall quality IMO. Otherwise everyone would be listening to Yngwie Malmsteen.
 
F

Fugu

Member
I have a degree in music and analysis is my specialty. This can be boiled down to two statements:

1. Music theory says absolutely nothing about quality. You can identify endless patterns in music but it will never help you make a statement about "good" or "bad". Maybe "simple" or "complex", but not good or bad.

2. Music reviews are about taste curating and popularity contests. If you find a guy who likes what you like, you may get something out of it. Otherwise? It's pretty useles..
 
C

Conkersbadfurday

Member
I've always put music in a different realm of art when it comes to reviews/ratings/etc. I love a lot of bands and songs, but I find it hard to say why other than "it's catchy" or "I like that guy's voice."

I can go on and on about movies and books, from plot structure to character development to sentences or camera work, but I don't know fuckall about why a certain guitar riff does me a happy while another one makes me shrug and go "eh."

And to be honest, I'm fine with that. I don't want to start scrutinizing music too much for fear I"ll end up finding big flaws in songs i like that i won't be able to overlook. Kind of a "i can't unnotice that" thing.
 
D

daviyoung

Banned
Schattenjäger;241565461 said:
When critics rate movies, they rate them on a number of things... plot, dialogue, acting, directing; etc - all tangible items
Click to expand...

So harmony, lyrics, instruments and composition/mixing
 
J

John Kowalski

Banned
proto said:
Definitely don't agree with the bolded statement. A songs technicality has very little to do with its overall quality IMO. Otherwise everyone would be listening to Yngwie Malmsteen.
Click to expand...

You know most people like things even if they're not extremely formally competent but maybe just good enough and to their tastes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mario's creator Shigeru Miyamoto thanks the critics for the bad reviews which helped the movie make money
2
55
5K
Davey Cakes replied
So uhhh there's been no good Spiderman film since 2004 huh?
2
71
3K
Dark Star replied
Avatar 2: Way of the Water is a Technical Marvel
33
1K
sankt-Antonio replied
Dune: Part Two - Review Thread
News 6 7 8 9 10
491
23K
jonnyp replied
Oppenheimer | Review Thread
Community Event Science
24
2K
kurisu_1974 replied
Top Bottom