"why does this matter? some of the greatest artists of all time had no formal training. it's art. it's expression. why do you need to be 'trained' to be an artist?"

If you are not trained to be a musician then you're probably willing to sell yourself and be a product (that's how it works right?), then at least be distinct and have some self worth. No, this doesn't apply to "Stupid Hoe" and shit like that.

"real art"

I don't get why I'm getting nitpicked for saying that. You can be artful even when you're not doing something overly serious.

Lady Gaga has been quoted many times on artistic expression and what not. Her shows are huge and she relies on theatrics and such, but even if you take all of that away and strip her to only her piano she still can pull off a great show. I don't listen to her music, but she is credible no question and has proven to possess talent.

Do that with this "artist", what does she have? Voice? Ability on instruments? Lyrical prowess? Oh wait I get it, ass shaking. How you can give credibility to someone like that is completely unjustifiable.

Apparently the album title is a euphemism for the clitoris. Nicki isn't afraid of nobody!

Album Rating: 2.5

Or, you know, some people have their own unique opinions that happen to not be the same as yours.

Album Rating: 3.0

yeah ok, good thread, but i have a question: how does this compare selena gomez's newest?

Opinions? There is subjectivity and then there is objectivity.

I could say I hated Classical music, and that would be fine, musical taste is subjective. However, I could never say that Brahms or Mozart were terrible musicians. And if I did hate classical music, could I review Mozart's Requiem and rate it a 1/5? Maybe I could substantiate it, but every argument I would use would be completely devoid of objectivity and solely based on my personal opinion (which is subjective).

Now, should reviews be subjective or objective? What separates a review from an opinion?

I could never say that Brahms or Mozart were terrible musicians.

Album Rating: 3.0

wait fucking shit selena's newest album wasn't a new LP, it's a compilation >8(

I could say it but not objectively back it up, so it would be meaningless. That's what I meant.

I could say it but not objectively back it up, so it would be meaningless. That's what I meant.

I could say it but not objectively back it up, so it would be meaningless.

Album Rating: 2.5

No, but he certain thinks he can.

Wow, this thread went somewhere. Not anywhere specifically, just...somewhere. Hang on a sec, I need to get some popcorn.

"Or, you know, some people have their own unique opinions that happen to not be the same as yours."

Just as I said before if you dig this kind of stuff then fine. But someone posted something about how can you take someones credibility as an artist and that's exactly what I did, I was proving my point. Make what you want of it.

"I agree with this. Nothing else would explain some of the reviews lately (this, Taylor Swift, etc) and all this absurd censorship."

yup, there's a fine line between advocacy journalism and propaganda ;)

well you're still dodging the whole nicki is good at her craft just like led zeppelin analogy that is completely annihilating your entire point but yeah other than that we proper gucci

Album Rating: 2.5

If you are not trained to be a musician then you're probably willing to sell yourself and be a product (that's how it works right?), then at least be distinct and have some self worth. No, this doesn't apply to "Stupid Hoe" and shit like that.

"you could explain why you can't connect with the music and how it does nothing for you, and give examples
why."

Saying I can't connect with it is not objective. I said I could not objectively back it up.



"Can you objectively back up the opposite?"

Yes I can. Music (like any other form of art) has methods, structures, technicality and also a context in
which it fits. That is the objective part of it. That is the part that just is, whether you like it or
not, whether the music makes you feel good or doesn't.

Album Rating: 3.0

"Yes I can. Music (like any other form of art) has methods, structures, technicality"



-none of these things are objectively good, so what's your point in listing this?



"and also a context in which it fits."



-whether it fits or not is subjective



nice try (and i can't believe i'm actually participating in this thread lmao)

Album Rating: 3.0

"yeah man, this guy used this chord and then he used this other chord afterwards, objectively good"

pretty safe to say that in the context of hip hop/pop nicki is superior in method structure and technicality to mozart and brahms so

"well you're still dodging the whole nicki is good at her craft just like led zeppelin analogy that is completely annihilating your entire point but yeah other than that we proper gucci"

Not really. Anyone can be put under my reasoning.

"what does she have? Voice? Ability on instruments? Lyrical prowess? Oh wait I get it, ass shaking. How you can give credibility to someone like that is completely unjustifiable."

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MI-_jWAmlE

Same thing with Lil Wayne though I'm still convinced Minaj would do worst.


"literally wtf is this?"

What do you mean? If you are not talented nor trained in music then you what do you have left to exploit?