The existence of the music industry stands as a barrier, more so categorization, of what makes something good or bad. Although, as time goes by standards are used to be let in by the gatekeepers, it still remains as a flawed system because at the end, music is subjective. After a morning debate with a friend about our opposing perceptions of what good music is, it stimulated me to write about it. Even though a legit analysis accompanied with scholarly articles and journals would make this discussion much more accurate and in-depth, this is only a blog post expressing my general opinion on the topic.
I'm using the word 'good' in a sense that it is sonically pleasing to hear. Where I stand, I say that good music refers to the content of a song; the melodies, the way it is sonically constructed, how well the harmonies work together, and so on. If it sounds good to me then I personally think it's good music. As Ezra Koenig once says, "Maybe there's no such thing as bad music. I guess bad music means that no one, not even the creator, likes it". While on the other hand, my friend argues that good music means good quality music. Quality, in this case, is the recording of the song itself - how it was mixed and mastered, how clear the tune is, basically, how well it was produced. He said that if it sounds like it was recorded through a tin can, it undermines the overall purpose of putting it out in the first place, because for him, it's not enjoyable to listen to. I understand that everyone has their own opinions and music caters people differently and I respect that, but he was so strongly opinionated and damn stubborn about being right that it riled me up.
The biggest flaw I found from his point of view is that you tend to overlook so many great talents just because their recordings aren't that great. Everyone has to start from somewhere. Not every musician knows how audio engineering works and not a lot of them understand and/or can afford the equipments needed, or in the simplest sense, they just want to record music for the fun of it. Personally I love the sound of demo tapes because that's where the heart of the song is. The rawness of these recordings increases my respect for musicians because they don't hide behind any extravagant production techniques. And, I mean, these are the recordings bands send to record labels! Sometimes I find debut albums to be overly produced and clean, which opposes the raunchy and sincere qualities of the demos. This is also one of the reasons why I love going to concerts so much; the music sounds a thousand times better and feels more real, plus, you can see them live in the flesh (!!!). I feel like concerts act as a test for bands to prove that they're as good as you think they are, and in most cases, they're better than I initially thought they were. You can perfectly construct a song and record it well, but if there's no sense of emotion in it then that's missing the whole point of making music.
Being a pretty emotionally inept person, I escape to music in the hopes of fulfilling or feeling any kind of emotion, thus, content is the number one thing for me. On top of that, my picky palette has only allowed me to listen to only certain types of music but thankfully it's been expanding greater. If anyone knows me from high school, you'd know that I was (and still is, to an extent) the hugest Foals fan. Not only did they open up my horizon on a new and interesting type of music and super groovy bass lines, but their albums cater to a wide range of emotions as well. And listening to their demos and b-sides is a way of knowing how far they've gotten in terms of content making and success. If it wasn't for those barn recordings, they wouldn't be where they are now.
As hard as I try to understand where my friend's coming from, I honestly don't know why he's very resistant towards my view. I understand that in his sense 'good music' refers to a very technical term that portrays how well the recording was constructed, but at the same time, I'm constantly puzzled on how a person who has the biggest passion for music can think like this. It really is a different world in Toronto and I think it's due to the wealth of concerts and 'indie' communities. The tight-knit community in Southeast Asia has resulted in feeling extremely, like, extremely thankful for seeing one of your favourite bands at least once in your lifetime, and you get so excited about finding a person who listens to a few of the same bands/artists as you. Thus, we tend to focus more on content because that's how we relate to bands and each other. Whereas my friend who has lived in Toronto his entire life focuses more on how to create music as professional as these artists in the hopes of attaining the same lifestyle one day. I'm not saying that these don't apply in the opposing places because I'm sure there are people like him in Southeast Asia and vice versa, but that's the biggest difference I found living in Toronto for 2 years.
There really is no set definition of good music. Prior, I didn't realise the scope music has on people and it's interesting to see how our context can really affect how we perceive things. Despite learning the importance of context in class, experiencing it first-hand in a field I'm passionate about has really hit the nail. So, I guess, good music is whatever you think sounds good to you.
Where do you stand in this argument? What are your thoughts on the topic? Is there such thing as good music? Let's all think critically and butcher each other opinions! n_n
