Album Rating: 5.0

not if all art is totally subjective there isn't!

Well yeah, that's completely right.

I mean, you don't mean to say that Black Sabbath's last album is better than their first? I mean, they're like 50 years more experienced these days, of course their newest album is objectively their best!

Well, let's put it this way: Of course I could just take a guitar without ever having played guitar and noodle around a bit despite me having no experience, then some guy coming around and being insanely touched by it, more than any Hendrix solo will ever touch him. The thing is, it's unlikely. Because the human body, in most cases, will not respond to my terrible guitar playing in a positive way. That doesn't mean it isn't theoretically possible. What I'm saying is: If you are inexperienced, chances are you will have trouble evoking positive reactions.

Album Rating: 5.0

Technical experience of a medium =/= time spent creating within the confines of that medium. There are other factors

that only goes to show the inferiority of pop music, where the novelty of a certain "spark" is the determining factor of enjoyment (and I say this with no hint of irony) more than calculated expertise, compared to art music where the expertise and maturity of a composer in his later works will 99% of the time overshadow anything he mustered in his naive and relatively untrained youthfulness

Album Rating: 5.0

I agree with both of the above comments actually

But that's also not true, in fact it's frequently disproven. Examples: Hellhammer, Celtic Frost, Venom, Mountain Goats, The Microphones, Daniel Johnston

And a lot of the time, extremely experienced guitarists provide very little of value. Jimmy Henrix isn't really loved for his technical talent or experience, but for the amount of improvisational and ~soulful~ music he produced.

Almost the entire genre of blues is based on sub-par guitar skill and experience and it's about as iconic and timeless as music can get

Album Rating: 5.0

Experience is linearly related to time practising but also compounded by the way that experience is shown - through art displays. Creation of a piece of art involves the intentions behind that piece and the use of the experience in channelled, efficient and suitable ways otherwise the experience gained is not displayed in the final art

Yeah, Astral, that might be true, but you REALLY don't want to hear me play guitar.

I'll also let it be known that you seem to enjoy a couple of my albums, and I have absolutely no experience on any of the instruments I play (except the drums which I've practiced for a several years). Literally everything I do is the product of an inexperienced whim to just play an instrument. Hell, I use Garageband to mix everything and my most popular album was recorded primarily on an iPhone.

Experience isn't really a factor.

You can't expect someone who's practiced and studied music for thirty years to produce anything good either. Experience doesn't matter in this debate. All this is to say that he's also assuming Mikko has no experience in visual art before deriding him for it.

Because this is a Deathspell thread and people were discussing one of the members of the band, and it came up that he's a visual artist, which set in motion this entire argument, supposedly hinged on the idea that his art is objectively bad due to his inexperience in the medium (despite the fact that he's been involved in many artistic mediums outside of music for a very long time now).

So my point was simply saying that his experience is irrelevant to the subjective nature of art, and has been proved thousands of times that experience does not have any relevance to how good or bad art can be.

To put it in the words of Homer Simpson, "Barney's film had heart, but Football In the Groin had a football in the groin."

Album Rating: 5.0

Nobody responds to a reasoned response, only bullshit responses, it seems. This is a stupid thread and needs to die as it's circular now and nobody gains anything from it.

So, how about this album, eh? Pretty great how they completely succeeded in their vision for the album.

Why don't we ask a couple fans if they believe the artist succeeded or not, and then go email Mikko Aspa about it and I'm sure he'll rethink what he did on the album if a fan critiques it.

I wouldn't have a clue about what their vision for the album is so I can't comment on that. Has some sick riffs tho.

Album Rating: 4.0

yes please

1:31 in Wings of Predation is one of my favourite moments in music ever

"While art is subjective, you're only semi-correct. Like I said, you cannot expect anything from anyone on complete ground zero to be capable of producing anything of value or merit at all, and while philosophically, you cannot do the same from someone with veteran levels of experience, on practical terms you have every right to."

Okay but why are we expecting people to do things here? The argument isn't "let's give my mother a saxophone and see if she can create a masterpiece with it", the argument is that somebody isn't objectively creating bad art just because they haven't been doing it for fifty years.

Album Rating: 4.5

I think I still slightly prefer the album that came after this