Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:37:16 -0700, "Jonathan El-Bizri" <ssrndpty@hotmail.com> wrote: >Sure thing, just as soon as you help my buddies solve the >'I-could-never-afford-all-this-music-I-downloaded-from-Napster,-what-should- >I-do?' problem. As far as I'm concerned, Napster users are thieves. End of story. >Does it finished product suck, or not? This is a lot >more important to me, as a 'consumer' of music, than the painfully grey >'legitmate art question'. Hey, I said that! About two and a half hours ago! ---- >From the critic's standpoint, theoretical interest is important. From the performer's standpoint, the practical interest of the piece matters. But from the lay listener's standpoint, it's only important whether it sounds good. I think that's why so many obviously untalented musicians become popular: they sound good. A performer may look at how they create music and go "why, it's all studio trickery" and turn up his nose. A critic may look at the structure of the music and say "why, it's almost childishly simplistic" and turn up his nose. But the public listens to the music and says "hey, that sounds good". ---- >Slightly more difficult to admit, it's even more important to me, from a >music consumer standpoint, than whether the artists involved 'forced' >collaboration. Anyone else here have "Deconstructing Beck"? ;)