Portrait of Tracy vs. Amazing Grace

[LucCole]

I recognize how most people feel about "vs." threads, but this is for a project in my philosophy of art class. According to Hume, some are better judges of certain kinds of art than others due to their "delicacy of taste". If this is true, than what better demographic of people to ask than the bass playing community?

Since Jaco and Wooten are both considered Gods in the Jazz Fusion genre, and since each solo incorporates the use of harmonics, we have some common ground between these two solos. Still, these solos have their differences. So my question to the bass forum is this: which of these two solos do you appreciate more? If you feel one is actually better than the other, please explain why. If you don't believe in the term "better" in regards to art, then please vote based on your own personal tastes; I would appreciate explanations for this as well.

Thanks in advance to those who choose to participate!

[Jimbobntnr]

amazing grace by far. I hear so much more emotion in Wooten's performance of this song than I ever hear in any PoT performance by Jaco. Fancy technique without emotion does nothing for me.

[Akira]

Amazing Grace, easily. PoT is technically impressive, but really doesn't sound that good to me. Vic's rendition of Amazing Grave sounds awesome.

[LucCole]

amazing grace by far.

May I inquire what criteria has led you to this preference?

[BassVirtuoso]

Portrait of Tracy, in terms of art. I believe it's far easier to repaint the Mona Lisa in brighter colors than painting The Temptation of St. Anthony for the first time.

[Jimbobntnr]

fixed, sorry.

[LucCole]

Portrait of Tracy, in terms of art. I believe it's far easier to repaint the Mona Lisa in brighter colors than painting The Temptation of St. Anthony for the first time.

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but do you mean to say that Jaco wins for originality?

[LucCole]

fixed, sorry.

No worries!

[BassVirtuoso]

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but do you mean to say that Jaco wins for originality?

Yes.

Pretty much everyone loves the Mona Lisa, except for hardcore nonconformist art 1337 I guess. I know a lot of people that can't stand anything Dali makes, just because it's so strange. Most of the people who like stuff like that, are in fact, artists.

[Akira]

Just throwing this out there - Wooten pretty much learned to use harmonics by staying up all night as a kid learning Portrait of Tracy.

[Left Shoe]

this is terribly hard.

jaco came first, when that song came out people had trouble beleiving it was a bass making all of those notes. i talked with some of the bass faculty at berklee on this, they said when that song came out everyone in the bass department **** themselves (after of course many weeks arguing if it was actually a bass) and they all spent hours trying to figure it out, one note at a time. i find this song to be extremely emotional, some people dont and thats okay.

now with wooten, his came after jacos piece, but he displays greater technique concerning harmonics (for example that scalular run using the harmonics he uses for a fill).


both songs use some advanced harmony.


i cant really judge these pieces against each other. One came first and made the whole bass world stop what they were doing, one came after and displayed greater technicality.

[LucCole]

Just throwing this out there - Wooten pretty much learned to use harmonics by staying up all night as a kid learning Portrait of Tracy.

The question isn't "who is a better player", but which piece of art you appreciate more.

[Akira]

The question isn't "who is a better player", but which piece of art you appreciate more.

I was just putting that in - Jaco laid the groundwork for Wooten. I don't know how what I said even remotely relates to "who is a better player".

[LucCole]

this is terribly hard.

jaco came first, when that song came out people had trouble beleiving it was a bass making all of those notes. i talked with some of the bass faculty at berklee on this, they said when that song came out everyone in the bass department **** themselves (after of course many weeks arguing if it was actually a bass) and they all spent hours trying to figure it out, one note at a time. i find this song to be extremely emotional, some people dont and thats okay.

now with wooten, his came after jacos piece, but he displays greater technique concerning harmonics (for example that scalular run using the harmonics he uses for a fill).


both songs use some advanced harmony.


i cant really judge these pieces against each other. One came first and made the whole bass world stop what they were doing, one came after and displayed greater technicality.


Well okay... but here's another thing I'd like to bring to the table. What about orchestration?

By the classical standards, Wooten's Amazing Grace solo is far more layered and dynamic. Yet everyone I know who likes PoT says the monotony of it plays a significant role in the droney, semi-depressing sound of it, which means that it was probably kept monotonous due to artistic intent.

[Soulfly666]

I'm going to go ahead and agree with everything Ignus said conerning Jaco and art on this one.

[Riouken]

I LOVE Victor wooten. He is my favourite bass player out of anything in anything and he's incredible

But I'm going to say Portrait of Tracy, in terms of art, creativity and in my opinion, sound... this one is "better".

I find Portrait of Tracy more harmonically interesting and something "new" to my ears you know? Victor did a good rendition of Amazing Grace but in terms of art and sound, I'm going with Jaco!

[funkyhoney]

out of sheer entertainment, amazing grace. i find it far more entertaining even though w00ten "funked it up". i've showed some people him playing it and they feel he "ruined" the song by not treating it seriously and giving it the respect it deserves... yeah, some people have no lives :p

if he didn't ad all the funky shiz i'd say PoT

[LucCole]

I was just putting that in - Jaco laid the groundwork for Wooten. I don't know how what I said even remotely relates to "who is a better player".

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post. My bad.

[Brandon_S]

I appreciate them both so much,its a incredible tie. I cannot pick one.

[HaVIC5]

amazing grace by far. I hear so much more emotion in Wooten's performance of this song than I ever hear in any PoT performance by Jaco. Fancy technique without emotion does nothing for me.

Strange, seeing as Portrait of Tracy is far less a display of technical prowess as Victor's Amazing Grace is. It might be hard to swallow, but its definitely not overly technical. Thats the least of what it is.

Portrait of Tracy is the clear winner here. Wooten's playing, while highly musical, and technical, tends to lead itself to fluff sometimes in my opinion when it comes to art. It's fun to consume, but sometimes there just isn't much there to digest. Portrait of Tracy has more substance.

[SixnStones]

I don't think I'm enough of a musician to have that delicacy of taste, but I prefer Amazing Grace. I've never heard a studio version, just his live one, in that video that's everywhere, and I just think it's so funky, and I really prefer it.

I wouldn't call Portrait of Tracy funky in the slightest, I think, possibly, it is more "substantial" than Amazing Grace, but in terms of what I'd like to listen to Wooten gets my vote.

Question though, someone compared this to Dali's work...Dali's work has recieved huge recognition not only in the eyes of artists, but almost everyone in the world has heard of Salvador Dali. This isn't really the same at all with Portrait of Tracy, I have yet to meet a non-musician; even non-bassists are a rarity here, that likes PoT. On the other hand there are plenty of non-artists who <3 Dali.

That post was so much longer than I intended.

[Thunder Fingers]

Amazing Grace is a great song, but as i despise both players, i vote nothing.

[Az_Holl]

:wave:

Obvious.

[Akira]

Amazing Grace is a great song, but as i despise both players, i vote nothing.

How can you despise two of the most important electric bassists in history?

[Thunder Fingers]

I hate their style of playing, as simple as that.

[funkyhoney]

I hate their style of playing, as simple as that.

too much thumpity thump for you eh?!

[Akira]

I hate their style of playing, as simple as that.

Yeah, but isn't "despise" sort of a strong word. I don't love either one, but I have the utmost respect for both of them.

[Thunder Fingers]

i have gotten them showed down my throat in the sense of "OMG! wooten is the faztzor!" "Oh, you play bass, a big fan of Jaco pastorius then?" "Oh you play bass, ever heard about Victor Wooten? he can play"

[funkyhoney]

i love australia, no one even knows what a bass is :lol:
















i'm serious

[SixnStones]

i have gotten them showed down my throat in the sense of "OMG! wooten is the faztzor!" "Oh, you play bass, a big fan of Jaco pastorius then?" "Oh you play bass, ever heard about Victor Wooten? he can play"

so? that's not their fault is it... in all fairness, victor wooten CAN play, and a lot of bass players are Jaco fans. :tossa:

and what dyu mean by their style of playing? jazz? funk? ¿que?

[Thunder Fingers]

Just that..blirdbildliblurp, tatatatablurpsblutghtaktakak style..

[SixnStones]

Just that..blirdbildliblurp, tatatatablurpsblutghtaktakak style..


OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH....tosser.

[Thunder Fingers]

:lol:

I always get so much hate when i say that i do not like these 2 :lol:

[White_Summer]

there is no real way you can conclusively say one is more artistic/better/original/wankerier than the other. its just like trying to say that bachs symphonies are more artistic/better/original/wankerier

[peeted]

portrait of tracy may be a completley new way of looking at bass, and on its own introduced a whole new method of playing the bass, but as a piece of music it just simpily aint that good.

I think Amazing Grace is teh clear winner hear.

[EADG]

i have gotten them showed down my throat in the sense of "OMG! wooten is the faztzor!" "Oh, you play bass, a big fan of Jaco pastorius then?" "Oh you play bass, ever heard about Victor Wooten? he can play"

So what... you feel inadequate or something?

[Knifeboy]

I highly prefer listening to Wooten's Amazing Grace over PoT

[White_Summer]

that post says it all, opinion people, there is no way to say one is better than the other, its stupid, so you should all just say they were both great(which they were) and if you like one more than the other than so be it, but it by no means gives it a higher quality simply because someone likes it

[equinox]

Portrait is wonderours to my ears, it is a pleasure to play. My vote to Jaco :).

[Mr. Pickle]

PoT is such a boring song. I accidentally voted for it, though.

[Jimbobntnr]

polls are hard

[Mr. Pickle]

Go die, plz.

[Spaceman Spiff]

that post says it all, opinion people, there is no way to say one is better than the other, its stupid, so you should all just say they were both great(which they were) and if you like one more than the other than so be it, but it by no means gives it a higher quality simply because someone likes it

What if my opinion is that they both suck?

[edgebass5]

I base my opinion purely on which one I enjoy hearing more, and considering I have never once listened to PoT and thought it sounded even remotely interesting (to be honest I find it a bit boring to listen to), yet have listened to AG many times and been blown away.... I voted for AG.

[JasonP]

I just listened to both for the first time ever,
and must say that Amazing Grace totally blew me away..
PoT is nice, and more original as has been said,
but Amazing Grace just sounds beautifull.

[BassVirtuoso]

that post says it all, opinion people, there is no way to say one is better than the other, its stupid, so you should all just say they were both great(which they were) and if you like one more than the other than so be it, but it by no means gives it a higher quality simply because someone likes it

With that logic, every debate and opposing side in the world is totally useless.

[edgebass5]

With that logic, every debate and opposing side in the world is totally useless.

For something with no basis in fact... absolutely. If the argument/debate has a basis in factual information and is not something purely based on opinion (such as this thread) then a clear cut answer can potentially be formulated.

[SixnStones]

There is good music, and there is bad music. You can like bad music, but that doesn't make it good. Opinion doesn't come into it, except for trying to figure out whether it really is bad or good.

[edgebass5]

There is good music, and there is bad music. You can like bad music, but that doesn't make it good. Opinion doesn't come into it, except for trying to figure out whether it really is bad or good.

I disagree with every bit of this statement except for the second half of the last sentence.

[o b s]

I something sounds good, it is good.

[hellonearth07]

PoT, IMO doesnt flow as well as amazing grace does. Yes amazing grace is a remake of a song everyone knows, but it has some original points that show the true creativity of wooten. I mean seriously, how many people would be able to remake the original with that much soul?

[Akira]

There is good music, and there is bad music. You can like bad music, but that doesn't make it good. Opinion doesn't come into it, except for trying to figure out whether it really is bad or good.

How can you justify that? There is no quantifiable measure of how good music is. It is purely opinion. Technical skill may be measurable (to an extent), but sound can not be objective labeled good or bad.

[EADG]

There is good music, and there is bad music. You can like bad music, but that doesn't make it good. Opinion doesn't come into it, except for trying to figure out whether it really is bad or good.


This = opinion.


Kind of ironic eh...

[MichaelGou]

my vote as to appreciation goes for portrait of tracy. to come up with an original work of art like that requires a lot of passion. it might not be the most showy piece, but imagine jaco in the works of developing the song. what kind of emotions and feelings were running through his veins when he composed this work of art? im not saying wooten is no different either. b/c wooten is amazing too. i just appreciate portrait of tracy more, even though both songs are Great.

[SixnStones]

This = opinion.


Kind of ironic eh...

how is that opinion?

[DBoons Ghost]

Jaco wrote and arranged Portrait of Tracy from scratch.

Wooten rearranged an age old composition for the bass. This is somehow remotely comparable? I can't believe this is even a discussion. If Wooten had composed and written Amazing Grace, mayhaps we'd have something to discuss here.

[Spaceman Spiff]

how is that opinion?

How isn't it? You said there is good and bad music; good and bad are subjective. I determine what's good and bad to me, you determine what's good and bad to you. It's all opinion. I don't think you'd go around saying that a band is bad if you like them.

[edgebass5]

This is somehow remotely comparable?

Look at the opinion of the two that I gave for a reason as to why they are comparable :thumb:

[DBoons Ghost]

Look at the opinion of the two that I gave for a reason as to why they are comparable :thumb:

It makes sense when you put it that way.

[DBoons Ghost]

How can you despise two of the most important electric bassists in history?

This is just a lie.

[Jaded]

There is good music, and there is bad music. You can like bad music, but that doesn't make it good. Opinion doesn't come into it, except for trying to figure out whether it really is bad or good.
This statement is pretty self contradictory.

[peeted]

There is no right and wrong when it comes to music, all values things have are ultimately ascribed to them by humans. That doesn't mean that its pointless debating which is the best piece of music though, since we all have very similar views on what we enjoy listening to and therefor are merely debating in relationship to a few assumed positive and negative values in relation to the music.

Were not going to somehow reach some higher truth through debating about how good the pieces are but its still enjoyable and intresting to discuss it.

[BassVirtuoso]

*Grabs opinion light saber*

IF IT'S WAR THEY WANT

LET'S GIVE THEM WAR

[Mr. Pickle]

I can't believe there are people in here arguing about opinions...

[Jaded]

Look at the thread title.

[Akira]

This is just a lie.

Maybe about Wooten, but how can you argue Jaco's importance?

[SixnStones]

How isn't it? You said there is good and bad music; good and bad are subjective. I determine what's good and bad to me, you determine what's good and bad to you. It's all opinion. I don't think you'd go around saying that a band is bad if you like them.

Nah, there's objectively good and bad music. I'm not saying I can tell, but they're just out there ya know? You can think what you like, but there is a right answer.

[Akira]

Nah, there's objectively good and bad music. I'm not saying I can tell, but they're just out there ya know? You can think what you like, but there is a right answer.

What objective measures of musical value are there?

[Spaceman Spiff]

Nah, there's objectively good and bad music. I'm not saying I can tell, but they're just out there ya know? You can think what you like, but there is a right answer.

No.

[peeted]

there is no objective "good and bad" in music, they are just values placed on it by humans. Objectively all music is is a form of sound which we have placed certain subjective values on and formed rules about. All the ways to judge the merits of music are based on subjective judgements such as "groove" and originality.

[Left Shoe]

no one post in here evar again

[Jaded]

portrait of tracy may be a completley new way of looking at bass, and on its own introduced a whole new method of playing the bass, but as a piece of music it just simpily aint that good.


hmmmm

[MichaelGou]

portrait of tracy may be a completley new way of looking at bass, and on its own introduced a whole new method of playing the bass, but as a piece of music it just simpily aint that good.

.



thats a bold statement. can you tell me why it isnt that good?

[EADG]

how is that opinion?

You think that there is "good" and "bad" music by nature and opinion isn't a factor


I (and several other people in this thread) do not agree with you, and most think the complete opposite.



THEREFORE, since you have nothing factual or concrete to back up your statement, it is an opinion.

You're basically saying that opinion is not included in your opinion. That's ironic.

[HaVIC5]

PoT, IMO doesnt flow as well as amazing grace does. Yes amazing grace is a remake of a song everyone knows, but it has some original points that show the true creativity of wooten. I mean seriously, how many people would be able to remake the original with that much soul?
Gospel choirs. Gospel choirs would be able to recreate the original with way the **** more soul than Wooten.

Here's a socratic question on the issue of the subjectivity of music. If you honestly believed that music and art were completely subjective, why would you ever practice your instrument? To get "better" at it? To "better" express your ideas to other people?

[Jaded]

thats a bold statement. can you tell me why it isnt that good?

Not without being a hypocrite :thumb: .

[Akira]

Gospel choirs. Gospel choirs would be able to recreate the original with way the **** more soul than Wooten.

Here's a socratic question on the issue of the subjectivity of music. If you honestly believed that music and art were completely subjective, why would you ever practice your instrument? To get "better" at it? To "better" express your ideas to other people?

But there is a difference between how well you play and how good your music is.
I would argue that you can definitely argue technical ability objectively, but I don't think you can measure how "good" music is objectively. I mean To one person "good" might mean complex, to another it might mean catchy. Who's to say which is right?

[LucCole]

Jaco wrote and arranged Portrait of Tracy from scratch.

Wooten rearranged an age old composition for the bass. This is somehow remotely comparable? I can't believe this is even a discussion. If Wooten had composed and written Amazing Grace, mayhaps we'd have something to discuss here.

Look dude, as I said, this was for a philosophy project.

If it eases the minds of the posters on this thread, the whole point of it was to show that even among people who know a craft (in this instance it was bass solos) would be divided on issues regarding the quality of any given art piece(s). The whole point of this thread was, in fact, to show that judgement of art can't be looked at as any more than mere opinion. To go back to the thesis, it was meant to show that even those with the most "delicate of tastes" aren't going to agree, because that which tastes better varies from person to person.

If you like the taste of sorrow and original expression, then you probably voted for Jaco. If you like the taste of funky groove and technical virtuosity, then you probably voted for Wooten.

So thanks again to all who got involved in this poll. If it means anything, the speech went pretty damn good.

[LucCole]

Gospel choirs. Gospel choirs would be able to recreate the original with way the **** more soul than Wooten.

Here's a socratic question on the issue of the subjectivity of music. If you honestly believed that music and art were completely subjective, why would you ever practice your instrument? To get "better" at it? To "better" express your ideas to other people?

Here's the Kantian refutation. Art is the product of genius, which is innate in those who have it; genius cannot be taught. But art also has a mechanical side to it as well, which consists of technique and theory. The purpose of the mechanical side to art is to act as a means by which the artist's genius can express itself.

In other words, someone can be better than someone else at an instrument, but that doesn't make their music any better. Take a look at Michael Angelo Batio.

[DBoons Ghost]

Maybe about Wooten, but how can you argue Jaco's importance?

The bass world would have continued without him, and Stanley Clarke's influence would have done the same, but more subtle, by way of copycats.

Honestly, tell me you're happy that nearly every new bass virtuoso out in the last 10 years sounds exactly like Jaco by way of tone. All Jaco really brought to the mix was his monster tone. He played Jazz standards on an electric. Stanley Clarke was doing the same, but in more commercial vein. Jaco was a talented composer, but is that what he's known for? Nope. It's his tone. It's his harmonics, which the only difference is he did it on his electric bass. Mingus, Brown, and even good ol' Stanley Clarke used artifical harmonics just as good if not better than Jaco. Clarke bended artificial harmonics like nobody's business. Listen to School Days.

Don't get me wrong. I love Jaco. I think his impact on the bass is significant, but the bass world would have continued to evolve and thrive without him. I can name 5 players who's influence pales Jacos, and provide examples as to why. And I would also love to discuss why the bass world would almost be better off without Jaco's influence.

[DBoons Ghost]

Look dude, as I said, this was for a philosophy project.

Yeah, but you should have chosen two original pieces is all I was saying, to offer a more realistic comparison to what you were trying to do. Berlin's Water on the Brain perhaps, or something original by another bass virtuoso.

Someone made a good enough point as to why, and I stopped posting about it.

Either way, I hope you did well on your project and I didn't intend to offer any further derision into this subject. :thumb:

[Akira]

The bass world would have continued without him, and Stanley Clarke's influence would have done the same, but more subtle, by way of copycats.

Honestly, tell me you're happy that nearly every new bass virtuoso out in the last 10 years sounds exactly like Jaco by way of tone. All Jaco really brought to the mix was his monster tone. He played Jazz standards on an electric. Stanley Clarke was doing the same, but in more commercial vein. Jaco was a talented composer, but is that what he's known for? Nope. It's his tone. It's his harmonics, which the only difference is he did it on his electric bass. Mingus, Brown, and even good ol' Stanley Clarke used artifical harmonics just as good if not better than Jaco. Clarke bended artificial harmonics like nobody's business. Listen to School Days.

Don't get me wrong. I love Jaco. I think his impact on the bass is significant, but the bass world would have continued to evolve and thrive without him. I can name 5 players who's influence pales Jacos, and provide examples as to why. And I would also love to discuss why the bass world would almost be better off without Jaco's influence.

I don't understand your argument at all. "The bass world would have continued without him"? Okay? It would have continued without Clarke too. It's not as though one musician can be credited with the success or failure of an instrument.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I don't understand your argument at all. "The bass world would have continued without him"? Okay? It would have continued without Clarke too. It's not as though one musician can be credited with the success or failure of an instrument.

I think that is his point, that people give Jaco too much credit and that the instrument would have done fine without him. Take away Clarke and it would have done fine. Take away Wooten or Miller and still have the same results.

[Akira]

I think that is his point, that people give Jaco too much credit and that the instrument would have done fine without him. Take away Clarke and it would have done fine. Take away Wooten or Miller and still have the same results.

But on that logic no one should get credit for anything, on the grounds that someone else would have come and done what the person did anyways.

[FoStringFlo]

Tracy for me. Grace is good, but PoT is just ethereal. It is also an original composition = major points.

[SixnStones]

Hmm, weird. Amazing grace is winning, but i swear more people support PoT

[naut]

i guess i'll go with Amazing Grace. i don't like it that much, but it is nice. PoT is straight up ugly...

[Jaded]

But on that logic no one should get credit for anything, on the grounds that someone else would have come and done what the person did anyways.

No, you're stretching it quite a bit. That doesn't logically follow.

[Akira]

No, you're stretching it quite a bit. That doesn't logically follow.

I don't see how "Someone else would have popularized the fretless bass like Jaco did" all that much different from "Someone else would have invented the light bulb".

[crazyjake19]

Even though Vic got a lot of his stuff from Jaco, I would definitely go with "Amazing Grace."

[Soulfly666]

I would also love to discuss why the bass world would almost be better off without Jaco's influence.

I would love to hear your take on that. :)

[Jaded]

I don't see how "Someone else would have popularized the fretless bass like Jaco did" all that much different from "Someone else would have invented the light bulb".
Because you are making the issue way too abstract. An invention is something done by an individual out of their own creative ingenuity. You can't accurately say that someone else would do it, because you don't know if someone else is going to have the same epiphany that leads to the creation of the invention.

[myassitches]

i don't know why, but victor wooten annoys me for some reason. of all the bass solos if listened i think portrait of tracy is the best.

[SixnStones]

You think that there is "good" and "bad" music by nature and opinion isn't a factor


I (and several other people in this thread) do not agree with you, and most think the complete opposite.



THEREFORE, since you have nothing factual or concrete to back up your statement, it is an opinion.

You're basically saying that opinion is not included in your opinion. That's ironic.

There's lots of factual and concrete evidence to back up my statement. But in the hypothetical situation, in which there wasn't, I'd be ridiculing how ridiculous this whole thread is. As i say tho, that doesn't matter, because I have lots of facts and concrete.

[Akira]

There's lots of factual and concrete evidence to back up my statement. But in the hypothetical situation, in which there wasn't, I'd be ridiculing how ridiculous this whole thread is. As i say tho, that doesn't matter, because I have lots of facts and concrete.

It's easy to say there are facts, how about you give one concrete support to the idea that there is objectively good and bad music?

[SixnStones]

It's easy to say there are facts, how about you give one concrete support to the idea that there is objectively good and bad music?

:lol:

Take for example, someone deliberatey playing a piano badly, in anger, for no artsy statement, not trying to make music, jst hitting it cuz its there. This is generally accepted as bad music. Trying to play Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata and messing up loads, by accident, is generally bad music.

Changing my argument: The smell of coffee is not music. Therefore some things ARE music, and some things ARE NOT music. If we say things that are music are good music, then we have to draw the line somewhere (between coffee and beethoven) therefore there is an objective difference. *shrugs*



Evidently you didn't get what I meant by my last post tho, i'm just taking the p¡ss, i don't believe any of the crap i'm spewing, but I am going to continue to argue for it, because it highlights how stupid the whole argument is.

[pipe]

im quite positive that there are some physical, mathematical and biological canons by which something can be considered more pleasing than something else. surely this can be applied to music.
for ex, a person is more physically attractive if their features respect the golden ratio. maybe there is some kind of golden ratio for music. someone a few weeks back posted an article on some russian guy that did some geometrical studies on chords and chord progressions and changes, i think it was havic. those studies could open a few doors to explaining why we love some music more that other music.
just my two cents there.

[SixnStones]

^ yeh, or that.

[peeted]

im quite positive that there are some physical, mathematical and biological canons by which something can be considered more pleasing than something else. surely this can be applied to music.
for ex, a person is more physically attractive if their features respect the golden ratio. maybe there is some kind of golden ratio for music. someone a few weeks back posted an article on some russian guy that did some geometrical studies on chords and chord progressions and changes, i think it was havic. those studies could open a few doors to explaining why we love some music more that other music.
just my two cents there.

How can there be a physical or mathematical definition of how pleasing something is? you could look at the characteristics the majority of people find attractive and apply it as a formula to characteristic's found in certain things but the basic parameters are still subjective because the formula would merely calculate the percentage of certain pleasing things present in the piece of music or art or whatever.

There is no mathematical formula for good or bad because good and bad will always just be defined by humans. Without anything to perceive things they merely exist free of meaning.

[pipe]

well, thousands of years of artistic tradition say that there is an objective criteria for beauty, and it depends on how an objects respects the proportions known as the golden ratio. that's a fact. its a biological and archetypical fact, go and look it up.
im just saying that maybe there is some kind of way to apply this golden ratio to music. why some chords and chord changes are more pleasing (generally speaking. thats the case with modern pop music. it appeals so much because it follows some kind of melodies and harmonies that the human brain finds more pleasing than others).
its not like its a mathematical formula that can be applied to every person in the world, because then you'd take out the part that individual experience and jugdement play on your reason and on you emotions. but it could be a rough guide to understand why we generally find listening to Mozart more pleasing that listening to Cecil Taylor.

[peeted]

Well iv looked up the golden ratio and its nothing more than a recurring geometrical pattern found in pieces of art and architecture which people have traditionally found aesthetically pleasing. Nothing more.

If we defined what we enjoyed as something completely different then there would probably be a similar recurring geometrical pattern. All we have done is got a set of criteria which we traditionally (and unconsciously) think of as beutiful, the golden ratio is just part of that.

[SixnStones]

50:50

You can look it at like this, logically, you have 3 scenarios:

[1] Everything is music.
[2] Nothing is music.
[3] Some things are music and some things are not music.

[1] is unlikely because i wouldn't say the letter 'r' is music
[2] seems unlikely, but could be true i guess
[3] most likely, therefore somewhere there is a line that must be drawn.

[peeted]

Well what im saying is that music is what we define as music and we judge music on particular given criteria which are ultimate subjective but which the majority of people would agree with. Therefor its imposable to judge music by completely objective criteria and there can never be any 1 correct answer BUT its not completley futile to discuss the pros and cons/wrongs and rights of different bands/genres/whatever because of the fact that the majority of people have a general consensus on what music is and on what the criteria by which we judge it are.

So my answer would (and has been all along) C, im just saying that there cant ever be some fixed formula for it or any innate aesthetic value and that its C because we decide its C....

Its all in my 2nd post :)

[SixnStones]

Yeh but there ARE objective criteria, we just don't know them. Therefore my point stands, that there is good and bad music, therefore it is theoretically possible to deem one song better than another.

In effect saying one song is closer to the letter 'r' than the other.

[Jaded]

What?

Whether or not something is music is discreet. Things are not more music than other things.

[peeted]

Yeh but there ARE objective criteria, we just don't know them. Therefore my point stands, that there is good and bad music, therefore it is theoretically possible to deem one song better than another.

In effect saying one song is closer to the letter 'r' than the other.

....why though? why would there be objective criteria? other than the existence of a god or some other far-fetched fantasy i see no logical reason to believe that there is an objective criteria for defining good and bad in music (or anything for that matter).

[SixnStones]

What?

Whether or not something is music is discreet. Things are not more music than other things.

Discrete. But yes, its still possible that PoT is not music, and Amazing Grace is. Or vice versa. You can't know, but it is possible

[Akira]

Discrete. But yes, its still possible that PoT is not music, and Amazing Grace is. Or vice versa. You can't know, but it is possible

Oh come on, now you are being silly. "Music" is a word. It has a definition! They are definitely both music.

[SixnStones]

:lol: I've been being silly all along... My argument has truely disappeared to rags though, well played boys.

[Jaded]

Discrete. But yes, its still possible that PoT is not music, and Amazing Grace is. Or vice versa. You can't know, but it is possible

Yeah yeah I meant discrete

[LucCole]

well, thousands of years of artistic tradition say that there is an objective criteria for beauty, and it depends on how an objects respects the proportions known as the golden ratio. that's a fact. its a biological and archetypical fact, go and look it up.
im just saying that maybe there is some kind of way to apply this golden ratio to music. why some chords and chord changes are more pleasing (generally speaking. thats the case with modern pop music. it appeals so much because it follows some kind of melodies and harmonies that the human brain finds more pleasing than others).
its not like its a mathematical formula that can be applied to every person in the world, because then you'd take out the part that individual experience and jugdement play on your reason and on you emotions. but it could be a rough guide to understand why we generally find listening to Mozart more pleasing that listening to Cecil Taylor.


Sorry for the late response, but I can't resist getting philosophical on this subject!

Here's my two cents:

The golden-ratio concept and our biological preferences for physical attraction are built into us to seek out a mate that is fit for reproduction; it's something that contributes to our ability to survive. Music does no such thing, and I would contend that our preferences are based on psychological conditioning. Furthermore, music had different purposes in different cultures throughout history: some used it to express their love of the land, some used it as a means of expressing their spirituality, some cultures like it purely for something to dance to, etc. From these different purposes comes different genres.

Tonal and melodic preferences could depend on the physiology of a certain ethnicity's vocal range, or what kind of resources were available in their given habitat to make instruments. Some cultures, like the Tuvans, make music by vocally imitating the sounds of their land and the animals they herd, and yet they still make full songs with melody, rhythm, and DEFINITELY harmony (these guys can harmonize with themselves without the use of effects!). This means that our habitat alone can affect our melodic and/or tonal preferences.

My conclusion: there is no golden-ratio for music. If the fact that people disagree on what sounds beautiful isn't evidence enough for this claim, then let's rely on anthropology (and maybe what we know so-far about psychology).

[katana_manatee]

For me I prefer Portrait of Tracy.

I love his tone on it, the harmony and the melodies he plays, it just sounds beautiful yet melancholy.

[pipe]

to LucCole, good answer. thats the type of answer i was looking for. i was just proposing an hypothesis, and this is a great argumentation on it. thanks

[thelowsoundofbass]

50:50

You can look it at like this, logically, you have 3 scenarios:

[1] Everything is music.
[2] Nothing is music.
[3] Some things are music and some things are not music.

[1] is unlikely because i wouldn't say the letter 'r' is music
[2] seems unlikely, but could be true i guess
[3] most likely, therefore somewhere there is a line that must be drawn.

This is true, but it has nothing to do with your argument. Because I am in a philosophical mood, I am going to see where this leads.

[1] You wouldn't say that the letter "r" is music, but the guy next to you might. Therefore, the answer that you provided to your own question is in fact, your opinion. Since you are trying to prove that there is factual "good" and "bad" music, this discredits your argument.

[2] The same as point [1].

[3] This one is much more interesting. First we have to look at the definition of music. From the webster online dictionary:


Main Entry:
mu·sic Listen to the pronunciation of music
Pronunciation:
\ˈmyü-zik\
Function:
noun
Usage:
often attributive
Etymology:
Middle English musik, from Anglo-French musike, from Latin musica, from Greek mousikē any art presided over by the Muses, especially music, from feminine of mousikos of the Muses, from Mousa Muse
Date:
13th century

1 a: the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition having unity and continuity b: vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or harmony2 a: an agreeable sound : euphony <her voice was music to my ears> b: musical quality <the music of verse>3: a musical accompaniment <a play set to music>4: the score of a musical composition set down on paper5: a distinctive type or category of music <there is a music for everybody — Eric Salzman>

Lets look at definition 2: an agreeable sound. What is agreeable? Well in fact that is based on opinion. To one person the sound of fingernails scraping across a blackboard might not be agreeable, but to the next it might. The same can be said for any sound that is produced. An out of tune E will upset most, but to one who is tone deaf they will not no any different and could say that it is agreeable to them. Your whole argument falls apart as soon as we start to look at some simple definitions.

lowsound

[BassIsPrettyCool]

Definitely Portrait of Tracy for me, only because it was written by Jaco. Amazing Grace wasn't written by Vic.