It's nothing. It's another object in a forest that has yet to be discovered.

People's opinions make this album good. The album itself just exists.

had an affirming listen to this recently.

where you'll find me now is still my fave jeff-y song though

Christ, you can't say anything anymore without someone thinking you're pretentious.

no, what does well mean? well is just the adverbial form of good, lol. everyone can agree that what they're playing is DIFFICULT, yes, but that doesn't improve the quality of the recording at all.

it would if you were listening solely because of the technical aspect. i personally dont give a shit about technicality so i listen to things i like to listen to based entirely off of my opinion of what sounds good.

even the 'technical quality' of instrument playing is subjective btw

i could say jimi hendrix sucks and you couldn't say i'm wrong even though 99% of people agree he was a great technical guitarist

i could also say some people shitty like the shaggs were the greatest instrument players ever

well w/e

technicality can be taught
everything else that makes music so good cant

Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off

haha, i know, i'm just trying to say that the closest you can GET to objectivity in music is people's majority opinions, granted that doesn't work because it means pop music would be the world's best when it's obviously NOT, but that doesn't mean technicality is any different.



bottom line is, this album rules because of the emotional response it evokes in me. and, it would seem, so many other people.

No, technicality has standards, opinions don't need any.

technicality has standards but those standards don't set the basis for quality

even if i'm some retarded guitarist who plays everything a 32nd off doesnt mean i'm 'bad' just because all instrument playing and music and all art is subjective

bottom line is, this album rules because of the emotional response it evokes in me. and, it would seem, so many other people.

Those standards set the basis for execution, which is quality in technical terms.

lol way to completely ignore the argument djorama

"
Those standards set the basis for execution, which is quality in technical terms." uh yeah in technical terms

you just went in a full circle there buddy

You need to take a full circle back to your library and hit the damn books.

Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off

technicality has a self-defined, inherent standards system which might be arbitrary and have no relevance to people's enjoyment but it's still a standard. if you can't hit notes in time then the music might sound better for it, but in terms of conventional technicality you're bad.

OKAY

Technicality has set standards i.e. speed, volume, tone, whatever

If you play with TECHNICALLY good speed volume whatever, you are a TECHNICALLY good player.

However, technically good doesn't equate to plain good (this album is proof; Jeff Mangum is a very flawed singer technically)

Technical quality is objective, overall quality is subjective

the end

lol people posting before me.

u suck xfd

Talk about full circle, you just completely agreed with me.