Double Core rating

[PublicImage]

Seems to me that you and I had a long discussion about this before.

As I recall, you ended up relenting before my indomitable logic.

Shall we try it again?

Feel free to dissect my post in your own time!

i can give reasons for this, Britney Spears for example. She is bad 1. Because she doesnt write her own music 2. She doesnt sing her own music, lip synching at every live perfomance 3. All of the music is so repetitive 4. There is no proper music that she is singing to, just more synthesized stuff

1. All cover songs, by that logic, are bad. As is every performance of classical compositions, because the orchestras who perform symphonies by dead composers obviously did not write it. Not having writing credit to a piece of music does not make it bad in any way, it just means that the performer did not write it. It is a fact, not a derogatory viewpoint, otherwise people would hate Jimi Hendrix's cover of All Along The Watchtower for that reason.

2. As oz1701 said, Roger Waters has lip-synched in the past. But that does not make him bad, does it? There is a difference between producing good music and providing good live musical performances, and I do not think that the point you are making is valid in trying to claim that her music is bad. Jimi Hendrix (sorry to use the same person for two examples), for an example, occasionally put on horrendous performances during the latter days of his life (notably the Isle of Wight performance), but I would not say that he was a bad guitarist because of it, in the same way that I would not say Britney Spears is bad just because she mimes during performances.

3. So is Die Forelle by Franz Schubert, and anything else that has every been written in (modified) strophic form, simply because it contains the same chord progression throughout each verse, as well as the same vocal melody; in that sense, you can call a fair amount of Pink Floyd's music repetitive. That does not make it bad, though. So What by Miles Davis is extremely repetitive from a musical aspect - it only features improvisation over two chords for the entire duration, but it still sounds good, in my opinion.

4. I thought you said that she always lip-synched at performances? PARADOX! Anyway, what is wrong with synthesised music? I think that Aphex Twin's music sounds absolutely brilliant, and it is almost all completely synthesised.

is it horribly discordant?

I LIKE SCHOENBERG! Honestly, I actually do.

[oz1701]

[quote="PublicImage!

i can give reasons for this, Britney Spears for example. She is bad 1. Because she doesnt write her own music 2. She doesnt sing her own music, lip synching at every live perfomance 3. All of the music is so repetitive 4. There is no proper music that she is singing to, just more synthesized stuff

1. All cover songs, by that logic, are bad. As is every performance of classical compositions, because the orchestras who perform symphonies by dead composers obviously did not write it. Not having writing credit to a piece of music does not make it bad in any way, it just means that the performer did not write it. It is a fact, not a derogatory viewpoint, otherwise people would hate Jimi Hendrix's cover of All Along The Watchtower for that reason.

2. As oz1701 said, Roger Waters has lip-synched in the past. But that does not make him bad, does it? There is a difference between producing good music and providing good live musical performances, and I do not think that the point you are making is valid in trying to claim that her music is bad. Jimi Hendrix (sorry to use the same person for two examples), for an example, occasionally put on horrendous performances during the latter days of his life (notably the Isle of Wight performance), but I would not say that he was a bad guitarist because of it, in the same way that I would not say Britney Spears is bad just because she mimes during performances.

3. So is Die Forelle by Franz Schubert, and anything else that has every been written in (modified) strophic form, simply because it contains the same chord progression throughout each verse, as well as the same vocal melody; in that sense, you can call a fair amount of Pink Floyd's music repetitive. That does not make it bad, though. So What by Miles Davis is extremely repetitive from a musical aspect - it only features improvisation over two chords for the entire duration, but it still sounds good, in my opinion.

4. I thought you said that she always lip-synched at performances? PARADOX! Anyway, what is wrong with synthesised music? I think that Aphex Twin's music sounds absolutely brilliant, and it is almost all completely synthesised.

is it horribly discordant?

I LIKE SCHOENBERG! Honestly, I actually do.[/quote]

10/10 Roger. good post

do you like Scriabin as well?

but if you like Schoenberg then you would'nt consider it horribly discordant - just discordant or nicely discordant.

[PublicImage]

I still haven't heard anything by Scriabin, shockingly. I have read about parallels between his and Chopin's styles, so I will have to listen to him because Chopin is my favourite composer and I have heard all of his compositions and need something new in that sort of style! Not that Chopin stuck to any particular style. Some of his works sound hideously classical whereas others are starkly different and represent the bombastic dramaticism of the Romantic era, which I like.

From a musicological point of view, I consider Schoenberg horribly dischordant! But I do like the sound of some of his compositions, although I haven't heard that many; mainly just some chamber music, and some peculiar octet which I cannot remember the name of. Or was that Messiaen? I forget. He was very strange, which is always a good thing where music is concerned. Not as strange as Satie the occultist, though! Haha, his biographies make him out to be such a weirdo. I love it.

[oz1701]

I still haven't heard anything by Scriabin, shockingly. I have read about parallels between his and Chopin's styles, so I will have to listen to him because Chopin is my favourite composer and I have heard all of his compositions and need something new in that sort of style! Not that Chopin stuck to any particular style. Some of his works sound hideously classical whereas others are starkly different and represent the bombastic dramaticism of the Romantic era, which I like.

From a musicological point of view, I consider Schoenberg horribly dischordant! But I do like the sound of some of his compositions, although I haven't heard that many; mainly just some chamber music, and some peculiar octet which I cannot remember the name of. Or was that Messiaen? I forget. He was very strange, which is always a good thing where music is concerned. Not as strange as Satie the occultist, though! Haha, his biographies make him out to be such a weirdo. I love it.

i did'nt know that about Satie. i have to confess i have only read about Scriabin, and i have nearly bought some of his music on a few occasions.

[PublicImage]

Scriabin's synesthesia is quite intriguing. Richard D. James (Aphex Twin) claims to have synesthesia, too. The link between that phenomenon and music is really quite interesting! Not as interesting as the bipolar/creativity link, though...

[oz1701]

Scriabin's synesthesia is quite intriguing. Richard D. James (Aphex Twin) claims to have synesthesia, too. The link between that phenomenon and music is really quite interesting! Not as interesting as the bipolar/creativity link, though...

boy are we going to catch it from Keith - this is supposed to be about rating double core - have you listened to it properly yet?

[mosespa]

Feel free to dissect my post in your own time!

No need to, really; as I recall that the crux of my argument was the fact that things need a reason in order to occur.

If one dislikes something, there is a specific reason for their not liking it. The reason can be identified through introspection, if one cares enough to be bothered with getting to know themselves.

Some people can't be bothered, apparently.

Back on topic:

I give Double Core a ten...but you'd kind of expect that, wouldn't you?

[oz1701]

Feel free to dissect my post in your own time!

No need to, really; as I recall that the crux of my argument was the fact that things need a reason in order to occur.

If one dislikes something, there is a specific reason for their not liking it. The reason can be identified through introspection, if one cares enough to be bothered with getting to know themselves.

Some people can't be bothered, apparently.

Back on topic:

I give Double Core a ten...but you'd kind of expect that, wouldn't you?

[mosespa]

Where did you find my Kindergarten picture?

[oz1701]

Where did you find my Kindergarten picture?

i just looked under "head swells after praise for double core" and there it was

[Duckboy]

i dont know what happened that day. It seems i went temporarily insane and started fighting with everyone. and i dont hate Britney although i do have a strong dislike for her music.

[oz1701]

i dont know what happened that day. It seems i went temporarily insane and started fighting with everyone. and i dont hate Britney although i do have a strong dislike for her music.

no sweat

[Duckboy]

[PublicImage]

No need to, really; as I recall that the crux of my argument was the fact that things need a reason in order to occur.

If one dislikes something, there is a specific reason for their not liking it. The reason can be identified through introspection, if one cares enough to be bothered with getting to know themselves.

Some people can't be bothered, apparently.

Okay, that makes perfect sense. Well done for enlightening my viewpoint.

I guess I felt like defending laziness that day. Haha.