i love rap

This forum is for the general discussion of Music.

Postby borpii » Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:05 pm

Were you telling me to chill? I thought I was a bit calmer than most... Guess my strong opinionated typing comes off as ranting. :? Excuse moi, peeps.
User avatar
borpii
 
Joined: 17 May 2003
Location: Around...

Postby FoolThemAll » Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:19 pm

Just for the record, I wasn't saying that most rap is objectively bad. I was saying that I simply dislike most rap.

Personally, I don't see much point in trying to judge music objectively. The subjective part of music is too important in my mind, and I don't think you can get a full measure of a song's quality without taking into account the subjective; objective observances are only part of it. And it's not like political systems or economic policies. It isn't the end of the world if a plurality hold The Beatles to be inferior to Britney Spears. Show me proof that being a diehard J-Lo fan causes harm, and I'll agree that there's a need for us to know/show for a fact that "Paint It Black" is better than "I'm Real".
_________________________
One more day to fool them all
One more day to drop the ball
One more day to fade away
FoolThemAll
 
Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Location: St. Clair Shores, MI

Postby Otohiko » Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:15 pm

Thanks to the latest two posters for a drop of reason in this conversation :)

Of course objective judgement of music is useless! It's all based on perception, and as you may have noticed - perception is subjective. Unless you're someone like Serpico, but we know what happens to such people :twisted:
Otohiko
 
Joined: 05 May 2003

Postby borpii » Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:28 pm

Otohiko wrote:Ok, chill.

Rap, personally, I attribute more to poetry than to music. Really, because it is.

Real music - please don't mess with that definition. Look in my profile to see why (that's been there since I joined).

Questions:

1) What is a real instrument?

2) What is nu-metal?

3) What is music?

My current answers...

1) Anything that produces sound when manipulated by a human

2) Let's just say that if it's what I think it means, I'd be addressing people who DON'T like it in most unpleasant terms.

3) Arrangment of sounds in time.


I was responding to this so I wasn't totally dropping the reason, just adding to my last post. :wink:
User avatar
borpii
 
Joined: 17 May 2003
Location: Around...

Postby Nonagon » Thu Jun 19, 2003 9:21 am

Otohiko wrote:Thanks to the latest two posters for a drop of reason in this conversation :)

Of course objective judgement of music is useless! It's all based on perception, and as you may have noticed - perception is subjective. Unless you're someone like Serpico, but we know what happens to such people :twisted:


For one, there's no such things as "objective judgement". It's an oxymoron.

Anyway, subjective debates <b>can</b> arrive at an objective conclusion. Stating that a debate is subjective does not mean it can't be reasonible concluded with objectivity. You just need people who are willing to cast away their personal beliefs while the debate is in session, which I don't expect any of you to do here.

Say the topic is God's existance. Now, something as irrational as a higher being that looks over us and judges us is nearly insane, but it is one of the more subjective debates out there for it's strict religious backing. The ancient Greek's debate this forever, and it still goes on ( obviously ), but they debated it without embarging on one another and never brought their own personal beliefs into it.

If we were to objectively debate music, you can't throw in your own tastes, but tell us WHY it's the most talented or complex, and why everyone should think so. Casting aside personal opinions. Why are the lyrics so thoughtworthy and meaningful, compare them to famous poets. Bring in theory, <i>the music is talented because the constant variation in time signatures is hard to pull of well and keep a steady flow in the song.</i> Why is something creative, ( yes, creative ) prove how he/she may have merged two styles or how the structure is based off some form of natural poetry that no one's ever brought forth.

Avoid words such as: <i>good, bad, garbage, etc. etc.</i>

And there you go. Always back up your arguement with objective reason.
-----------------------
Though, I've never seen anyone cast of their opinion for the outcome of objectivity. At least on this message board anyway.
- Nonagon
Code : White

Like everything in life, DaDa is useless.
DaDa is without pretention, as life should be.
User avatar
Nonagon
 
Joined: 05 May 2003
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby Otohiko » Thu Jun 19, 2003 12:43 pm

I'm hardly interested in what people listen to. I'm more interested in their reasons for listening to it. So, if you listen to rap because you relate well to the social situations brought up in the lyrics - I'd have nothing against you.

As far as my definition of real music, or talented music if you will - music that is played with intention, music that is played at a sufficient (note: not neccesarily high) technical level, music that is intellegent in nature. I find bringing in empirical measures kind of useless.

But if you go by what you're suggesting -

the music is talented because the constant variation in time signatures is hard to pull of well and keep a steady flow in the song. Why is something creative, ( yes, creative ) prove how he/she may have merged two styles or how the structure is based off some form of natural poetry that no one's ever brought forth.


then the choices for the title of the greatest band in the universe are pretty darn limited... But it's a fact that most people are hardly interested in complex or unusual music.

***

Erm... anyways. How the heck did we get to this from a discussion of Rap?
Otohiko
 
Joined: 05 May 2003

Postby paizuri » Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:04 pm

I listen to music that is played within my range of hearing.
My favorite video: Grilled Steak Trigun I LOVE THE COPS! Rargh!
I ain't 2 proud 2 beg! haha school rumble is great
Why do I always have the most preposterous sigs???
My current favorite thread. I'm a huge fan of GA-JAMMING.
User avatar
paizuri
 
Joined: 24 Sep 2001
Location: All hail me, the BEEFMASTER!!!!!

Postby Nonagon » Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:05 pm

Otohiko wrote:As far as my definition of real music, or talented music if you will - music that is played with intention, music that is played at a sufficient (note: not neccesarily high) technical level, music that is intellegent in nature. I find bringing in empirical measures kind of useless.


Great response, that's just what I was wanting to hear.
But if you go by what you're suggesting -

the music is talented because the constant variation in time signatures is hard to pull of well and keep a steady flow in the song. Why is something creative, ( yes, creative ) prove how he/she may have merged two styles or how the structure is based off some form of natural poetry that no one's ever brought forth.


then the choices for the title of the greatest band in the universe are pretty darn limited... But it's a fact that most people are hardly interested in complex or unusual music.


Yeah, it will be limited, but when you enter a debate like that you shouldn't have your mind on what band will be the greatest, but what data you have to have to arrive at such a conclusion.

I find that a lot of people like complex music, but yeah, most people don't. A lot of people like complex music, but don't have the knowledge to know that it's complex. Like Rush ; ) Haha, any unusual music...yeah...no one really likes that, in the states at least.

Erm... anyways. How the heck did we get to this from a discussion of Rap?


All good debates digress ; )
_______________________

In the end, el_farlo makes me want to hurl myself off a 20 story building because his thoughts are so limited. He can't think outside the box at all.
- Nonagon
Code : White

Like everything in life, DaDa is useless.
DaDa is without pretention, as life should be.
User avatar
Nonagon
 
Joined: 05 May 2003
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby borpii » Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:42 pm

Huh????????? :? :? :? :?
Too many words....
User avatar
borpii
 
Joined: 17 May 2003
Location: Around...

Postby Otohiko » Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:08 pm

Here's a bit of concrete evidence: a study conducted in Britain concluded that 90% of people aren't really receptive to music. Meaning that, as paizuri said, they listen to music that is within their range of hearing, and don't at all care what it is, or how complex or challenging it may be - they don't mind it as long as it's pleasant to the ear.

There really are artist who have complex music that's accessible to most people. Rush, I'd say, is definitely one of them.

As for the unusual artists - really, the reason they have such limited appeal is because well - they sound too strange, annoying or scary to most ears. Often, that's almost the only difference. There is, however, a fanbase for such music - even in America. That, most certainly, includes me :)

And just to go back to topic for a sec -

Huh?????????
Too many words....


Hey, you're the Rap guy! Isn't that what rap music is all about? :)
- all those words... I'm an instrumental kinda guy, so don't look at me :roll:
Otohiko
 
Joined: 05 May 2003

Postby borpii » Thu Jun 19, 2003 5:02 pm

:oops: Oh, yeah. Well they were using big intellectual words and I was hyper... :wink:
User avatar
borpii
 
Joined: 17 May 2003
Location: Around...

Postby FoolThemAll » Thu Jun 19, 2003 7:22 pm

Nonagon wrote:If we were to objectively debate music, you can't throw in your own tastes, but tell us WHY it's the most talented or complex, and why everyone should think so. Casting aside personal opinions. Why are the lyrics so thoughtworthy and meaningful, compare them to famous poets. Bring in theory, <i>the music is talented because the constant variation in time signatures is hard to pull of well and keep a steady flow in the song.</i> Why is something creative, ( yes, creative ) prove how he/she may have merged two styles or how the structure is based off some form of natural poetry that no one's ever brought forth.

Avoid words such as: <i>good, bad, garbage, etc. etc.</i>

And there you go. Always back up your arguement with objective reason.
-----------------------
Though, I've never seen anyone cast of their opinion for the outcome of objectivity. At least on this message board anyway.


I will agree that objective measures make for a more interesting debate, usually, as it beats "I like linkin park bcuz they rawk!" (they do, by the way). But it is my belief that in the case of music, the objective is subordinate to the subjective. Subjectivity can make complexity and talent moot. "They misused their talent/creativity and produced the mediocre Kid A." "Despite its simplicity, Yesterday remains one of the best songs of the 21st century." How do you prove such statements incorrect? I don't see a way. That is the point at which the hardline musical objectivists start the 'it's a fact you have bad taste' routine, sometimes in 1,000 word essays.
_________________________
One more day to fool them all
One more day to drop the ball
One more day to fade away
FoolThemAll
 
Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Location: St. Clair Shores, MI

Postby FoolThemAll » Thu Jun 19, 2003 7:23 pm

Ugh, 20th century. lol
_________________________
One more day to fool them all
One more day to drop the ball
One more day to fade away
FoolThemAll
 
Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Location: St. Clair Shores, MI

Postby Jace Tsunami » Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:56 pm

Rap sucks complete ass.

All rappers do is write horrible lyrics and sing "rap" with them. They don't actually write the music they rap to either. Now I must credit them that I'm sure it's not that easy to rap as some rappers do, I know I'd get tounge tied and shit, however, is it really that hard either? I know TONS of kids that can clone rappers voices.

So lets break it down. A rapper isn't really a musician, so where does all their credibility come from? Their credibility comes from writing bad ass original lyrics and making a "gangsta" performance. Too bad rappers now a days don't even write their own lyrics. They get paid from companies like Nike to rap about their clothes and shit. And no, I'm not just making this up because I'm biased and hate rap, even MTV (the biggest money leeches in the world) have articles about this. They make like all their money off rappers and pop stars, yet even they had to post an article about it.

Rappers ideas arn't original. They get paid by some crappy clothing company to rap about wearing their clothes on the "east side" and then they just find crappy out of no where catch phrases that ryhme with the clothes.

Them getting paid to rap about crap like this is just one reason why I hate rap, there are many more.

As for hose of you that would say "If you don't like rap, why not just avoid this thread?" With a thread title such as "I Love Rap" You guys asked for it. It would keep out of a respectable looking thread such as "50 Cent" A thread title like "I Love Rap" just has attention whore written all over it.

Most kids like rap because of the awsome melodies and "beats" they can nod their head to and shit. Well, rappers don't write that crap, they write cheesy rhymes about Nike. If you like the actual music so much, maybe you should look into the people who wrote it, because all these famous rappers today sure as hell didn't do it. That's like saying Avril Lavigne write her own music.
http://www.punkaddict.com

myspace.com/punkaddict
User avatar
Jace Tsunami
 
Joined: 02 Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles, Ca

Postby RobLoge85 » Fri Jun 20, 2003 6:20 pm

Well said Jace.
RobLoge85
 
Joined: 23 Dec 2002
Location: New York

PreviousNext

Return to Music Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest