25 albums that should not have been recorded

[Spiff]

Uh, your opinion on anti-matter theory vs a nuclear physicist's opinion.

 

one is more qualified than another.

 

 

next please...

and they are all still just theories and opinions. so you are nowhere.

[sox4lifeinPA]

if someone is an expert on something, even if it's a theory, how is that not a more qualified opinion?

 

is my definition off? or where is my logic incorrect?

 

you and I can have opinions about whether or not we should privitize social security, because our knowledge is the same (let's assume) However, someone who has more training and experience in a certain area is able to maintain a more competent and knowledgeable opinion about a subject.

 

or is that too easy? seriously, help me out?

[FlaSoxxJim]

Uh, your opinion on anti-matter theory vs a nuclear physicist's opinion.

 

one is more qualified than another.

 

 

next please...

Here it is, Bro. Music is Art. Art is Subjective. End of story.

 

The technical/stylistic/melodic merits etc., of a piece of music can be debated, and those with a musical schooling can speak more knowlegeably in these matters than a casual listener. As far as the 'artistic value' of the song, that is entirely subjective.

 

I have to remind myself of that every time I come back north and visit the Art Institut and see that %#*&$#! Marcel Duchamp shovel hanging from the gallery ceiling. The Dadaists did have a point though, and that is that if the artist says something is art, it's art. Even a %#*&$#! shovel hanging from a ceiling.

[Steff]

Uh, your opinion on anti-matter theory vs a nuclear physicist's opinion.

 

one is more qualified than another.

 

 

next please...

An opinion is an opinion. Not a fact. Someone can be more qualified to state facts.. but to state an opinion?

Well damn.. why bother with everyone having individual opinions at all and just let those most qualified speak..

 

And "next please" that stick out of your ass... there's no need to be rude, and if you didn't have anything nice to say you shouldn't have responded at all.

[BrandoFan]

I know a thing or two about music..I've been surrounded with it my entire life..listening, playing with my dad and brother..playing at family events..

So DON'T tell me you you know more than me..I too have alot of exposure to music also..I'm not saying i know more than you or anyone else about music..but i don't blatantly say i know more than anyone else..and "especially you"

Like you just said

 

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Wong & Owens]

Show me someone in the music "biz" that isn't pompous, and I'll show you a figment of your imagination.

 

I understand where PA is coming from, assuming his background is legit, but he's not arguing based on musical structure, and that is the only basis in which an "informed" person is more qualified to speak than a non-informed person(i.e, an informed person can look at a piece of sheet music, and know whether it requires much skill or not to play, a non-iformed person could not). The argument, in short, seems to be whether or not Korn is good or not, am I right? If so, then "good" is such a vague and subjective term, that no person is more "qualified" than another to determine a band's value measured in such terms. I don't think working as A) a musician, B) someone involved in other ways of getting music made, or C) a critic qualifies anyone moreso than a garbageman, astronaut or vet to determine whether any piece of art is good or not. For example, Jackson Pollock. Revered in some circles, very popular in others, certainly generally accepted as a "good" artist by those that deem themselves "qualified" to make such assessments, but in my opinion, he's a joke. Stood over a canvas with a brush and essentially spilled paint. What talent was on display? What profound statement was being made? In my opinion, it's s***, and no art teacher, historian, collector, et al is going to tell me otherwise because they have more art knowledge/experience/whatever. And they have no way to prove my "uninformed" opinion is wrong.

[Spiff]

Show me someone in the music "biz" that isn't pompous, and I'll show you a figment of your imagination.

 

I understand where PA is coming from, assuming his background is legit, but he's not arguing based on musical structure, and that is the only basis in which an "informed" person is more qualified to speak than a non-informed person(i.e, an informed person can look at a piece of sheet music, and know whether it requires much skill or not to play, a non-iformed person could not).  The argument, in short, seems to be whether or not Korn is good or not, am I right?  If so, then "good" is such a vague and subjective term, that no person is more "qualified" than another to determine a band's value measured in such terms.  I don't think working as A) a musician, B) someone involved in other ways of getting music made, or C) a critic qualifies anyone moreso than a garbageman, astronaut or vet to determine whether any piece of art is good or not.  For example, Jackson Pollock.  Revered in some circles, very popular in others, certainly generally accepted as a "good" artist by those that deem themselves "qualified" to make such assessments, but in my opinion, he's a joke.  Stood over a canvas with a brush and essentially spilled paint.  What talent was on display?  What profound statement was being made?  In my opinion, it's s***, and no art teacher, historian, collector, et al is going to tell me otherwise because they have more art knowledge/experience/whatever.  And they have no way to prove my "uninformed" opinion is wrong.

Exactly. You, FlaSoxxJim, and Steff all said what I meant to say but couldn't articulate.

[BrandoFan]

Ziggy Stardust Motion Picture Soundtrack was released in 1983. Now THAT'S MY BOWIE

 

 

...ass opposed to PA's Bowie circa Goblin King, all spandex and nutsac.

[BrandoFan]

For example, Jackson Pollock. Revered in some circles, very popular in others, certainly generally accepted as a "good" artist by those that deem themselves "qualified" to make such assessments, but in my opinion, he's a joke. Stood over a canvas with a brush and essentially spilled paint

.

 

I think me and CW had debated over it back when, trying to tippy-toe around saying the same thing, lolol........BUT

 

What talent was on display?

 

What "talent" are you looking for?

 

What profound statement was being made?

 

Ditto.

 

In my opinion, it's s***, and no art teacher, historian, collector, et al is going to tell me otherwise because they have more art knowledge/experience/whatever. And they have no way to prove my "uninformed" opinion is wrong.

 

Say, you were to run into JP's secret diary, where he expains with detail and verve what exactly inspired and motivated him and what exactly was encrypted in his "paint spills"........Would that make a slightest difference to you? Cuz I tell you, I smell a wise-ass phillistine.

[sox4lifeinPA]

still nothing resolved, although an "I love you steff and I'm sorry" is due.

 

and does Korn still suck and Chicken f***ers are still bad?

 

this thread is hilarious

[Wong & Owens]

"Say, you were to run into JP's secret diary, where he expains with detail and verve what exactly inspired and motivated him and what exactly was encrypted in his "paint spills"........Would that make a slightest difference to you? Cuz I tell you, I smell a wise-ass phillistine. "

 

No, and that's my point. Some people can view it as talented, or deep, or pretty, important, etc., and nothing I can say to them would change their opinion, nor is there anything I could do to prove them wrong. Were I the curator of the Art Institute of Chicago(do Institutes have curators? Or is that only museums?), and thought JP's work was crap, but a 10-yr old kid told me it was beautifully thought out, and striking, nothing in my supposed background would give me the sufficient proof to tell him he was wrong.

[Rex Kickass]

I've only heard the Pablo Picasso cover from the new album, never saw the commercial.  I heard some of Heathen and liked it, but have not picked up anything since before Outside.  Based on your feedback I might be missing out, I'll have to fix that.

The Heart's Filthy Lesson was from the album 1. Outside, a renewal of the Bowie/Eno collaboration from 1995. It is also the sessions where Afraid of Americans was first recorded, you can find the original of it on the "Showgirls" soundtrack. There was supposed to be an instrumental followup called 2. Inside. Never released.

 

Strangers When We Meet is the clunker on the album, a tack on from Buddha of Suburbia sessions that doesn't fit with the rest of the dark album. Hello, Spaceman, a huge highlight.

[Rex Kickass]

...ass opposed to PA's Bowie circa Goblin King, all spandex and nutsac.

Holy s***, I can't watch that movie anymore. There's an Armadillo in his damn trousers.

[BrandoFan]

and they are all still just theories and opinions. so you are nowhere.

So when you get that lump on your testicle, do you

 

a) shrug it off as nothing because, well, it happens to be your opinion....which is obviously as valuable/subjective as anyone else's.......even though you've been a tiny-brained no-goodnik all your life.

 

or

 

 

b.) run like a b**** to see a certified urologist/oncologist, crossing your fingers, hoping to God that in his QUALIFIED opinion there is nothing to worry about.

 

 

 

 

Hypothetical question as it were.

[BrandoFan]

Music is Art. Art is Subjective. End of story

 

Fair enough, though more and more the ultimate and unassailable relativity/subjectivity of it all becomes a convenient refuge in the hands of the lazy and/or the incapable....instead of being the last option avalilable to those who've exhaused every other means of persuation, hitting the proverbial dead end.

 

(See: Dumensil versus Claimont as one instance)

 

And no disrespect to my uncle, but Pauline Kael's opinion means more to me than his when movies are concerned.

[sox4lifeinPA]

this is turing out to be an interesting debate. I hope everyone's cool headed now. brando, that's exactly my point. and maybe it's more difficult to qualify artistic opinions, but I still believe some people have more ability to judge music more than others. why shouldn't that be the case?

[Spiff]

So when you get that lump on your testicle, do you

 

a) shrug it off as nothing because, well, it happens to be your opinion....which is obviously as valuable/subjective as anyone else's.......even though you've been a tiny-brained no-goodnik all your life.

 

or

 

 

b.) run like a b**** to see a certified urologist/oncologist, crossing your fingers, hoping to God that in his QUALIFIED opinion there is nothing to worry about.

 

 

 

 

Hypothetical question as it were.

deduction/diagnosis is different from opinion.

 

and would you f***ing grow up instead of throwing around insults, who the f*** are you to call anyone a tiny-brained no-goodnik? you do nothing but take away from this place.

[sox4lifeinPA]

bwaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaha

[Wong & Owens]

So when you get that lump on your testicle, do you

 

a) shrug it off as nothing because, well, it happens to be your opinion....which is obviously as valuable/subjective as anyone else's.......even though you've been a tiny-brained no-goodnik all your life.

 

or

 

 

b.) run like a b**** to see a certified urologist/oncologist, crossing your fingers, hoping to God that in his QUALIFIED opinion there is nothing to worry about.

 

 

 

 

Hypothetical question as it were.

That's completely different. You're really not going to the doctor for his "opinion" at all. You're going to essentially get tested for a condition that can be proven to exist, that which is not subject to any opinion at all. You get a biopsy on a tumor, and it turns up malignant, no opinion from anyone that says it's non-cancerous should be given any merit.

[BrandoFan]

and maybe it's more difficult to qualify artistic opinions, but I still believe some people have more ability to judge music more than others

 

I consider myself to be as democratic and PC as anyone here, frequently defending POV's I may not have much affinity or respect for.....And I DO think PA is out of line, though I don't consider KORN to be a great band by any stretch of imagination. But whatever.

 

Spiff: When you and Steff and others all but imply that all opinions are by default equal/valuable/relative, it sounds just as ridiculous as trying to "mathematically prove" that Caruso was better than Callas.....Just the good ol' anti-intellectual, amateurish, feel-good drivel.

 

Just because certainty, precision, logic, erudition and rules play a much smaller role in ART than they do in science or sports, DOESN'T mean they have NO role whatsoever. Common mistake.

 

That's where you get delusional arhythmic and off-key vacuous American Idle rejected contestants. They just can't believe that they OBJECTIVELY lack in talent and that there are QUALIFIED people out there who can confirm that for them in a second. It's not their fault, of course, they're only human. And who knows may be in 30 years when all standards of excellence are gone, they may be considered worthy of stardom....

 

And I didn't mean "you" as in YOU personally. But I can tell you where you can stuff that strained indignation.

[BrandoFan]

and would you f***ing grow up instead of throwing around insults, who the f*** are you to call anyone a tiny-brained no-goodnik? you do nothing but take away from this place.

 

Is it my fault that I am not as bright and educated as you? I was born this way.

 

Have some compassion.

[BrandoFan]

No, and that's my point. Some people can view it as talented, or deep, or pretty, important, etc., and nothing I can say to them would change their opinion, nor is there anything I could do to prove them wrong.

 

Ever considered that other people may not be made from the same stubborn (you don't even allow for the possibility that your mind may change about JP) mold as youtself? That maybe they happen to like JP or some of his work for a certain reason(s)? And that if you present a piece of evidence or strong arguement against his art, perhaps exposing him and his aesthetics or philosophy as fraudulent or grossely overrated, their favorable opinion about his work will change?

 

Were I the curator of the Art Institute of Chicago(do Institutes have curators? Or is that only museums?), and thought JP's work was crap, but a 10-yr old kid told me it was beautifully thought out, and striking, nothing in my supposed background would give me the sufficient proof to tell him he was wrong.

 

It's not as clear cut (let alone constant) as you make it out to be. When I was 10yo lad I liked certain things and didn't others for a whole variety of reasons. As I kept growing I changed....many times over, sometimes literally overnight and only realized it in retrospect. If I didn't have "curators" telling me I was "wrong", that probably wouldn't happened.

[Spiff]

I consider myself to be as democratic and PC as anyone here, frequently defending POV's I may not have much affinity or respect  for.....And I DO think PA is out of line, though I don't consider KORN to be a great band by any stretch of imagination. But whatever.

 

Spiff:  When you and Steff and others all but imply that all opinions are by default equal/valuable/relative, it sounds just as ridiculous as trying to "mathematically prove" that Caruso was better than Callas.....Just the good ol' anti-intellectual, amateurish, feel-good drivel.

 

Just because certainty, precision, logic, erudition and rules play a much smaller role in ART than they do in science or sports, DOESN'T mean they have NO role whatsoever. Common mistake.

 

That's where you get delusional arhythmic and off-key vacuous American Idle rejected contestants. They just can't believe that they OBJECTIVELY lack in talent and that there are QUALIFIED people out there who can confirm that for them in a second. It's not their fault, of course, they're only human.  And who knows may be in 30 years when all standards of excellence are gone, they may be considered worthy of stardom....

 

And I didn't mean "you" as in YOU personally. But I can tell you where you can stuff that strained indignation.

Well all opinions may not be equal by default, but they are still opinions so there is no way with something like music that you can prove you are right. American Idol is a good example until you consider it is still all relative. Look at music from other countries; Germany, India, Japan all have different ways of judging "good" music but they are totally different from what most people here consider "good". And even though the American Idol judges tell people they are awful, if someone thinks one of the rejects is actually a good singer then there is no way to prove them wrong. Opinions of anything whether it be music, movies, physical activities, wine-tasting, or anything else is just how much value it has to the individual. If you listen to a song and say "This really does nothing for me" and someone else says "What are you talking about, this is awesome!", there is still no way they can make you like it, and it doesn't make them right.

 

I know what you are saying as far as logic, precision and rules etc but that still doesn't cut it when you get right down to it. Those are still just precedents set by past examples. Some music may come close to them than others, but there is still an absence of intrinsic goodness or badness.

[GASHWOUND]

smug- n. "Studiously neat or nice, especially in dress; spruce; affectedly precise; smooth and prim."

 

 

I thank you, kind sir.

 

 

smug- n. "Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with oneself or with one's situation; self-righteously complacent"

 

 

Ohhh, I thank you again!

 

You're entitled to your opinion gashyson. If you love Korn, then have at it. It's difficult to argue one's preferences, however, I can argue that my opinion is more qualified and informed because I have more experience and knowledge on the subject.

 

sometimes confidence is mistaken as smugness.

Oh brother..should we call you Mr. Dictionary because you seem to be going through my posts with a fine toothed comb looking for spelling mistakes and misuses of words...That's interesting, meaning you're grasping for straws dude

Lame....Lame...Lame

 

And only you would celebrate on being a smug person....That's kinda sad..

Try some of that humble pie..it's quite good

[sox4lifeinPA]

are we talking about musical personal preference or qualified individuals opinions?

 

I think we all agree now that opinions can differ and are good in their own right, but there has to be room for striation in qualification of opinions.

 

my opinions about baseball may differ and but equally valid as Peter Gammons. However, the dude gets paid for speculation and analysis of a sport with millions of opinions and preferences and I don't. Clearly his knowledge and experience alone make his opinions more qualified regardless of correctness and accuracy.

 

Professionals do what they do because they're qualified and more knowledgeable than the lay person, no matter the vehicle of his trade. Religious folk argue the concept/opinions of faith and religion, and one person's (The POPE) opinions are worth far more over another. (haha, not mine though)

 

I'm not sure why this is so hard? erase validity and egality from the definition of qualified. One person more "knowledgeable and skilled" on a topic, by definition has a more qualified opinion.