Post your "UNPOPULAR" music opinions!

[miyuu 40]

aren't we expressing opinions. i can describe however i want. i don't get your point . is there a correct way to express your opinion? why people should not use those when they say their opinion.

if you are talking to me. i am not mad. i have no clue what you are saying most of the times. i can't understand your point. hiroki makes me understand better.

i think your english is fine. but i seriouly can't understand what you are trying to say and what your point is

 

edit: oh wait i think i get it. all this time you are just telling me that  your unpopular opinion is when people use these words
to describe you are annoyed or disagree with the use. omfg and i am having all this conversation. xD orz.
it's an opinion though, some people see progress. personally it depends on the case  what i will say.

[hitsuji-hime 211]

^^^that might actually be a popular opinion

 

Oh, my bad lmao xD

 

I thought I was gonna get dirt for that, lol.

[Lestat 2167]

Miyuu, I do not think you understand that this topic is indeed about opinions; I've been under the impression that you have a hard time understanding that opinions indeed, do vary from individual to individual and should be respected. A discussion is fine, but do not let it get out of hand by saying that someone's thoughts are flawed or ridiculous. The saying of shoving your opinion down someone's throat seems to apply in this case and it's not something you get far with, as it usually results in a negative discussion that will leave either one of the discussing parties upset or frustrated, because obviously one cannot influence another's thought patterns. You appear to be mocking other people's opinions with an overuse of expressions like xD and lol, and this often goes unappreciated and will only drive you in a corner. 

 

Music is an art expression form. There is no 'good' or 'bad' art, it's what the people's choice decides. I've seen people adore blank canvases painted in one colour, whereas I do not get the point of how a flat painting can impress others, yet I respect this and leave it out of my own business. Whether or not someone decides to set their foot upon the path of progression as we call it, then that is something people can either relish in or not. After all, it is not the fan's decision whether or not an artist progresses or advances or remains evenly matched to their image as it is currently. Art is a loose concept that cannot quite be grasped upon with a solid grip; even the worst artists have fans, even those artists who evermore remain stuck within a pattern that they've been constantly repeating, they have admirers. Artist who constantly change their style and movements, those have admirers too. 

[miyuu 40]

are you serious? you have not understand anything i ever said. read it again or don't read it. honestly i do not care about your ignorance. i am really tired to explain the same things. and i am over this discussion.

you are accusing me of not accepting others opinions. when all i ever try to do is support that everyone should say their opinions. this is a joke. did  you ever read anything i ever wrote.  the only opinion i had a problem with and i didn't accept it , was when it was expressed in a dogmatic way. who ever speaks to me in a dogmatic way , i would take his opinion as a joke and a failure.

[Lestat 2167]

See, calling people a joke or a failure is exactly what I mean by disrespectful and mocking behaviour that will lead you to an event of people not taking your opinion seriously, and as there is nothing dogmatic about DogMan's opinion I do not see why you are making that statement. Derogatory terms do not quite have an effect if you desire to have people listen to you speak, it is rather repelling and keeps people at a fair distance.

 

I can read perfectly what you write and I am not at all receiving a good vibe from this, and I do not think I am the only one. If you feel so attacked then perhaps you should attempt and find a manner of expressing yourself that is less discourteous. 

[miyuu 40]

random note .i wasn't talking about @dogman. when i said about dogmatic. i think himself knows that though . @Rocketeer let people talk to you in a dogmatic way . you seem like you are the person they are looking for

 

(edit:i didn't have a problem with @ DogManX. i was trying to understand what he was saying. and we had a random discussion .but i think he knows that. but you seem to not understand)

[DogManX 179]

A "dogma" declares itself as not being questionable. It is not synonymous with the rejection of false questions. Keep our "discussion" in mind when you accuse people of being dogmatic in the future.

[miyuu 40]

i still don't understand your point i am sorry xD. I do not know why i don't get what you are trying to tell me. i am not sure if this is what you telling.
but yes you are no god or authoritarian figure (i am not referring to you personally, generally example),so you won't speak to me in such an arrogant way .because then i will not accept to listen to you. i will consider your opinion worthless no matter if is true or false. i am open minded ,only when others are. if others are close minded, i would have the same reaction to them. you were not being dogmatic though.i never saw you as dogmatic .we just had different opinions.

i mean  in a discussion. because if you are like this, it's not  a discussion really

(the opinion i was referring to if you are curious, i didn't make a big deal of it because is an unpopular opinions thread and it would be silly to comment more.but i saw it as arrogant xD  edit: but people often express themselves in similar ways generally)

[sai 868]

To me, DogManX was merely stating what the word meant and referring how it linked to your earlier discussion of "progress is just a matter of opinion", don't take anything as an attack against your persona. I'd also advice you to read a person's post again if you don't understand it at first, and if you still don't understand what they're trying to say afterwards, don't reply to it. This will only lead to misunderstandings and misunderstandings are the main cause of a lot of foul discussions and unnecessary insults. If you do not understand someone at first (or if you have trouble understanding English), do not immediately think they're trying to offend you and start calling them names. This is highly unprofessional, immature and I doubt many would feel encouraged to have a good discussion with you in the future.

 

As was stated in the first post of this thread:

 

"Also, feel free to discuss the opions that others post!"

 

If you're going to have to be offensive to everyone who doesn't agree with you I'd suggest you'd further not participate in this thread.

[miyuu 40]

i read it like 13 times. but he was referring at something i said personally.so i thought why not ask him. i don't take it as attack. i just do not have a problem discussing and answering in things, i do not consider it spam. but i get now that others do . so i will never post again

 

edit: were the fuck was i offensive? i will never write in this forum ever again. i regret so much ever writing anything here .

[doombox 4421]

I keep listening to the new girugamesh album and it sounds like Satoshi was way more invested in REDMAN than gravitation. He sounds like he's just going through the motions for the sake of the others at this point.

[hiroki 5521]

I keep listening to the new girugamesh album and it sounds like Satoshi was way more invested in REDMAN than gravitation. He sounds like he's just going through the motions for the sake of the others at this point.

I thought I was the only one who felt that way. I'm not gonna pretend that I can read anyone's mind, but it does feel as if Satoshi indeed enjoys the kind of music REDMAN does more - and that giru is only returning to the more metalcore-ish sound (of gravitation) as a reaction against the backlash the band had suffered for going down the poppier route.

[doombox 4421]

I thought I was the only one who felt that way. I'm not gonna pretend that I can read anyone's mind, but it does feel as if Satoshi indeed enjoys the kind of music REDMAN does more - and that giru is only returning to the more metalcore-ish sound (of gravitation) as a reaction against the backlash the band had suffered for going down the poppier route.

Glad to see I'm not the only one, either! Yeah, I can't speak for him, only the way his voice makes me feel when I listen to him versus how he used to sound to me. So it's all speculation, of course. But something I thought immediately when he did the REDMAN project was that it was a trade off. I guess the next girugamesh full album will show if this was just a splash in the pan or if they are going to press on with this sound. But I think Satoshi's heart is in the poppier music recently, or he just needs a lot more time to adapt to these changes (if I give him the benefit of the doubt).

[beni 2149]

Being a bit brave and coming back here with a different opinion (and having really wanted to catch up with the other new posts here).

I remember reading possibly on here or on last.fm about unknown VK bands, the indie ones, which only have released a couple of tracks and even disbanded. I get told a lot that there's always a reason a band is popular, and that I agree on of course. What I don't agree with is these small indie bands being called insignificant or bad. They should all be given a chance and since they're just starting out, they haven't even shown what they're all made of. Of course I'm guessing why most wouldn't bother with these little groups is because they probably all sound/look the same. But to me, (another unpopular opinion maybe?), the majority of bands which are major do not sound as inspiring and individual as these smaller groups. I really can't say I'm absolutely certain of this one to be honest, since I don't listen to a load of indie ones (and I'm like 99% wrong all the time), I feel like I'm letting out some steam or ranting after reading some negative responses to small bands. I mean, they were just starting out, every band becomes better over time. (ANOTHER unpopular opinion? xD) This is totally not aimed at anyone by the way, even if you disagree.

 

Oh yeah, I just remembered another one after looking through the thread again. And this one I'm not too worried or scared about saying because I totally stand by this and maybe it's not that unpopular. About when and how a band changes their style/music direction, I think that's always a good thing. Even if it's executed badly. This is because I think the band are showing that they're really trying to do their best, trying different styles, trying to be individual and out there. It's a breath of fresh air and also could even bring in more fans with a different style, and make comparing their old and new work interesting. To me, it's got a lot of pluses even if they're not as good as before. I'm sure everyone who's still reading have a couple of bands in mind about this one. xD

Edited October 6, 2014 by benibana

[Lestat 2167]

^ I agree with you fully. Personally, I am not quite interested in major and big bands (i.e. The Gazette, SuG, Alice Nine, etc.) because those sound and look exactly the same to me. I haven't the slightest clue how these bands were 'chosen' to become popular or why people overhype them so extremely whereas their performances are bland.

There are only a few big bands I like, but most of those derive from the late 80's and early 90's like X JAPAN or BUCK-TICK. They are icons, real rock stars, they lived the lifestyle in poorness and now luxury because they deserve a way on the top. But those silly boybands? I have clue what's attractive about them, it's probably just my personal taste but there are hundreds of indie bands out there that deserve a lot more than whoever is on the rise now.

[relentless 254]

This is already a very dubious claim in politics, but even more so when we find ourselves in the sphere of art and aesthetics (which music is part of). Does abstract art represent "progress" from Renaissance painting? How about Prokofiev over Bach? 20th-century stream-of-consciousness literature over Charles Dickens? Who decides?

 

Who decides? Scholars in their respective fields, mainly. "Progress" in the context you are using it may imply change that is "good" or "bad"; but when discussing evolving forms of art, it is seen as progress on the grounds that it is developing a new concept that yields greater understanding to the medium, yes, even in aesthetics.

 

A better example would have been Schoenberg over Bach. Can we objectively say that Schoenberg is better than Bach or vice versa? No. That is an extra-musical value judgement that has no place in the discussion of "progression"; but what of Schoenberg's Twelve-tone technique? With the avoidance of traditional harmony we were introduced to atonality, and "free atonality" by Schoenberg. Is what he developed objectively good? No. That's another value judgement; but is it progress? Yes. It is a development of harmony and a development of old forms to yield a fresh take on music. One does not have to like Schoenberg's twelve-tone technique; but by yielding a greater understanding of music and the relation of notes, we see the very progression in our modern understanding of music.

 

Whether this "progression" is good or bad is entirely dependent on the listener; but that does not mean it is non existent.

 

 

 

EDIT: Though, here we are trying to take Art Music standards of musical development and apply it to Popular Music, which a lot of the time can be dubious as you said.

Edited October 8, 2014 by relentless

[hiroki 5521]

Who decides? Scholars in their respective fields, mainly. "Progress" in the context you are using it may imply change that is "good" or "bad"; but when discussing evolving forms of art, it is seen as progress on the grounds that it is developing a new concept that yields greater understanding to the medium, yes, even in aesthetics.

A better example would have been Schoenberg over Bach. Can we objectively say that Schoenberg is better than Bach or vice versa? No. That is an extra-musical value judgement that has no place in the discussion of "progression"; but what of Schoenberg's Twelve-tone technique? With the avoidance of traditional harmony we were introduced to atonality, and "free atonality" by Schoenberg. Is what he developed objectively good? No. That's another value judgement; but is it progress? Yes. It is a development of harmony and a development of old forms to yield a fresh take on music. One does not have to like Schoenberg's twelve-tone technique; but by yielding a greater understanding of music and the relation of notes, we see the very progression in our modern understanding of music.

Whether this "progression" is good or bad is entirely dependent on the listener; but that does not mean it is non existent.

Interesting take. I'll just respond to this very briefly as I don't have much time.

If I haven't misinterpreted what you're saying (which I hope I haven't), you're suggesting that there are two kinds of "progress" at stake - firstly, one that is based on individual value judgment ("good" or "bad"); and another that's based on some kind of adopted standard by a particular community with the relevant authority (scholars, musicologists, etc.)

The question I'll ask is whether it's even possible to parcel out the definition of "progress" in the way you've done, because for me "progress" invariably implicates a value judgment. In other words, when you say B represents a progress over A, the implication is that A => B represents a trajectory leading us to an end-state that's somehow more favorable than where we've begun. You mentioned that Schoenberg's shift to atonality is a "fresh take" that "[yields] a greater understanding of music and the relation of notes", by virtue of which it is progress. But this assertion presupposes that to have twelve-tone technique in the contemporary musical repertoire is better than not having it and being "constrained" by traditional fugal harmonies, conventional cadences, etc. This claim is true only if we accept the unstated premise that more diversity is good. It is not on the surface of the argument (B is better than A), but at the level of this underlying principle (having both A and B is better than having A alone) where the normative element is being smuggled in, the latter being a principle that's by no means universal nor totally uncontroversial (just talk to any of the conservative music scholars for starters). Put differently, with Schoenberg we can only say there is a proliferation of difference (or what the French philosopher Lyotard calls "accumulation of knowledge" in the context of technological "progress"); to equate this "accumulation" to progress is to assume there is a transcendental criterion by which "more" is adjudged to be "good".

In short: yes, there is change and accumulation and diversity. But to equate any or all of these to progress is to lapse into making a normative claim.

Just my 2c (And btw I do happen to believe that more diversity is good, lol)

[DogManX 179]

@hiroki

 

Very beautiful response. Couldn't have expressed it as good as that. Exactly my thoughts.

[relentless 254]

The question I'll ask is whether it's even possible to parcel out the definition of "progress" in the way you've done, because for me "progress" invariably implicates a value judgment. In other words, when you say B represents a progress over A, the implication is that A => B represents a trajectory leading us to an end-state that's somehow more favorable than where we've begun.

 

In this instance "progress" is used only to signify a progression in the understanding of traditional forms of Classical and the development of harmony within that movement. It's not progress as in "Schoenberg's Twelve-tone technique is an improvement over Bach's horizontal method of harmony"; but in the sense of "Schoenberg's Twelve-tone technique develops new concepts in harmony that yields to greater understanding of tonality and its uses". It's a new understanding of traditional forms and how to present them. It's not that any more value is placed on the twelve-tone technique (if anything, my personal preferences lie with Bach, not Schoenberg), it's that there is a development from the traditional forms to present something new that can be explored and studied as well as offering a different perspective on music not available in the 17th and 18th centuries. That's the only "progress" that is evident: greater understanding of music with new theories to inform studying and composing music. One is not better than the other, as both of them are important in the development of harmony and tonality, It's not necessarily "progress over __________" kind of music, it is simply a progression in study, understanding, and writing of music thereafter. Classical is rooted in traditional forms and over the hundreds of years those forms have been developed. Music went from horizontal to vertical (chord based) in the late 17th to 18th century with Rameau and various scholars and composers before him. This yielded a greater understanding as to the relation of notes to each other. Then we get atonality in the 20th century and the twelve-tone technique that acted as a similar development (though admittedly far less popular) as before with a further understanding of what's possible in music, and a new form that can be gauged by a movement (Classical) that is based in those forms.

 

I don't like using "progress" in the sense that something progresses OVER something else, especially in Classical when there is constant development of forms. Instead I look at it as another means of development in how we look at and understand music: a natural progression. This becomes problematic because many bands that "progress" in sound in Popular Music don't change at all. People talk of "progress" in Popular Music to signify a change to a style or genre that was different from before: this says nothing about their compositions, and in most cases there's not even any development in the music. A band could play a chord progression in a certain genre or style, add distortion to that progression, change the tempo, change the instruments, and that would be seen as "progress" by people which i wholeheartedly agree is dubious. It's just that in the case of theory and our understanding of music, new ideas and forms only show a progression for the sake of study and understanding. There's no value assigned to them other than preference, which doesn't really have a place in a discussion on harmony.

[hiroki 5521]

^ Thanks for taking the time to clear that up. What you're saying then is that in theory (in both senses of the word), atonality, dissonance, and other contemporary innovations have opened up new possibilities that challenge traditional forms - which you call a "progression". In that case I don't think there's any disagreement between us except a very trivial verbal difference; because what you call "progression" I call "change". The widening of horizons (as an objective matter-of-fact observation) is also quite frankly indisputable, and it can be sketched out quite nicely without any reference to "progress" (in the strong sense).

[Elazmus 1873]

Ok here we go. I enjoyed 12012's whole comeback since 2012. I don't think I've ever had anyone agree lmao.

[DogManX 179]

Ok here we go. I enjoyed 12012's whole comeback since 2012. I don't think I've ever had anyone agree lmao.

 

You're damn right

 

Ok this one is going to be a bit controversial:

 

I just can't enjoy VK vocalists embracing this kind of metro/homo/girlie voice style any more. I got tired of it. And it's sad since the music per se is still awesome to me. Argh-

[Elazmus 1873]

Ahh I see, examples? I can think of plenty of examples of that kind of singing style but everyone has their own cut-off for what becomes unpleasant lmaoo

[Seimeisen 4406]

Ok here we go. I enjoyed 12012's whole comeback since 2012. I don't think I've ever had anyone agree lmao.

Uhh... I agree!!!

I mean, I wasn't the greatest fan of their self-titled album, but CUNNING KILLER and the three mini albums were all incredibly awesome.

[Elazmus 1873]

Like honestly, the self titled album felt very amateur to me, full of rip-off material and it was flawed from head to toe, but enjoyable? I can't deny lol. I still found plenty of sections that I would repeat from.. but yeah, I was fully into Cunning Killer, DOS, The Swan  XD

 

Everything I say is with zero real musical education of course, but I could tell on the album that it was an alien concept to them