response 98 of 194:

Jan 25 23:47 UTC 2001

Some of the Dummies books are well written and are aimed not at stupid people
but at ignorant people.  Maybe classical music requires more training to
appreciate it.  I have heard lots of bad classical music and some good pop
music.

response 100 of 194:

Jan 26 07:36 UTC 2001

Paul Kershaw #87 wrote: "It's not splitting hairs to point out 
that "appalling" carries a value judgment. It does."

And "disappointing" also carries a value judgment.  The hair-splitting 
criticism of John was for saying "appalling" rather 
than "disappointing" (actual example offered in the critique).

Bruce #84 wrote: "once you have The New World Symphony in your 
collection, you are not going to have to replace it very often."

That depends on what kind of classical collector you are.  I know 
people who really do insist on getting all the recordings, though 
they're considered a little odd.  A large part of the late 80s-90s 
classical boom consisted of people replacing their LPs with CDs.  Both 
of which examples rather prove the point.

McNally #80 wrote: "It's clearly apparent to anyone who cares about 
music that the diversity of music being recorded is declining 
substantially in conjunction with modern music marketing and retail 
trends."

That depends entirely on where you shop.  (And on what you define as 
the golden age of diverse music, I suppose.)

Michael Delizia #93 wrote: "The other side contends that it's all just 
a matter of taste, and that one kind of music can't possibly be 
intrinsically better than another.  How can it?  It's all just notes on 
a page.  Are you seriously saying that the notes on a page of classical 
music are somehow more moral or more politically correct than the notes 
on a page of pop music?  That sitting through a Bach cantata makes me a 
better person that listening to a Beatles song?"

The flaw in that argument is not that nobody is a perfect relativist, 
it's that those are really anemic and comically utilitarian ways of 
judging the relative value of art.  More aesthetically valid methods 
should not be hard to think of.

response 102 of 194:

Jan 26 17:13 UTC 2001

There's a third alternative to the two that Michael Deliza mentions in
#93.  It's possible to be an absolutist when discussing two examples of
the same genre, but a relativist when discussing two different genres. 
This lets you say things like "The Beatles are a great pop band" and
"Johnny Cash is a great country singer." and even "Garth Brooks is a
decent pop singer, but a terrible country musician" without needing to
have an opinion about whether pop is _better_ than country.

The idea here would be something like this: a genre of music is
essentially a _set of criteria_ for what makes good music.  So rather than
saying "classical music is music with lots of violins" and "punk is loud
fast music with drums and guitars" [both too simple], you say "good
classical music should have an interesting structure and be performed with
clean tone" and "good punk should be simple and catchy, with a solid beat
and lots of energy" [still both too simple].

The catch is, these criteria are almost all unconscious, especially in
non-classical music.  So-called "simple" music, like punk or blues, often
has very subtle criteria that aren't easy to explain.  

After all, if blues really was as simple as people who don't like it
claim, you'd expect anybody with a year of guitar lessons behind them to
be able to play good blues.  Instead, it takes years and years of careful
listening and practice to get beyond "godawful" and into "mediocre," and
even the so-called simple blues fans will know right away when a musician
doesn't have it.  (Same thing with punk, actually -- most of the punk fans
I know think most of the punk bands out there are terrible, and only
really respect the top few).

response 104 of 194:

Jan 26 18:55 UTC 2001

Read some of the audio newsgroups on USENET and you'll get the 
impression that many classical fans don't believe in CDs...

response 106 of 194:

Jan 27 01:10 UTC 2001

Well, yes, to the extent that some folks prefer truly antique triode designs
using directly-heated cathodes.  I'm finding I care less and less these days
about tubes, although my little guitar amp still uses them.

response 108 of 194:

Jan 27 17:08 UTC 2001

David Brodbeck is right: many classical fans actually do despise CDs.  
And there are markets to cater to them: I have seen new high-end 
classical LPs for sale as recently as last year.  The used classical 
recording collectors' market is still over 90% LPs, and half of the 
reset is reel-to-reel tapes.

Many other classical fans, however, flocked to CDs in droves, much to 
the disgust of the LP purist minority.  That certainly was a major 
component of the classical CD boom, which was the original point.

Orinoco is also right: it's always easier to compare apples to apples.  
But then, of course, there are those who insist a Red Delicious can't 
be compared to a Pippin, and so on and so on.  I find this in 
discussing fantasy literature a lot: people say a book must be judged 
on its own terms, but then in practice they'll define "its own terms" 
as "whatever it takes to define this book as good."

Granted that "classical music should have an interesting structure" is 
too simple a definition, there is still classical music that 
deliberately dispenses with interesting structure, and claims that it's 
good on different terms.

If Michael Delizia's cryptic #101 means he thinks I should do his job 
for him and post a list of aesthetically valid ways to judge music, he 
is mistaken.

response 110 of 194:

Jan 28 14:18 UTC 2001

I have no problem at all with brighn being appauled at John
having used the word appauled.  It simply adds to the enjoyment
of this fine item.

response 112 of 194:

Jan 30 21:52 UTC 2001

Paul: The difference between the value judgment carried by "appalling" 
and the value judgment carried by "disappointing" is a good example of 
what I was calling hair-splitting.  That one is stronger than the other 
is undeniable.  But to condemn John for using the first, while actually 
recommending the second as a replacement, is ... putting a giant moral 
difference on a relatively tiny distinction.  In other words, hair-
splitting.  IMGDAO.

response 114 of 194:

Jan 31 14:25 UTC 2001

I'm appalled that this discussion is going on so long.

response 116 of 194:

Jan 31 15:07 UTC 2001

Nah, I think we, or at least I know you a little better than that, to be
shocked by it

response 118 of 194:

Feb 1 00:41 UTC 2001

heaven forfend!

response 120 of 194:

Feb 1 04:18 UTC 2001

TV's got them images
TV's got them all
Nothing's shocking

*slow dirgelike bass lick*

Everybody everybody everybody-y-y-y-y
Nothing's shocking

response 122 of 194:

Feb 1 20:56 UTC 2001

Hey, speaking of snide songs written about specific people (see the Stupid
Music Item, or whatever it's called)... yeah, Jane's Addiction's "Ted, Just
Admit It," a paean of sorts to Ted Bundy.