How does one defiine good/bad taste in art, if at all?

[Kman]

i dunno what kinda stuff you're listening to but some of it's really interesting

oh wow

yeah lol i can see why you'd get turned off by the genre by that but that's really not a good representation of the genre at all, i mean it does focus heavily on minimalism but it's not just pure silence. you should look at those two songs i linked cause i honestly think you'd probably enjoy them given the stuff you usually link

[Bridge]

i dunno what kinda stuff you're listening to but some of it's really interesting

oh wow

yeah lol i can see why you'd get turned off by the genre by that but that's really not a good representation of the genre at all, i mean it does focus heavily on minimalism but it's not just pure silence. you should look at those two songs i linked cause i honestly think you'd probably enjoy them given the stuff you usually link

Yeah, they aren't bad. However, the Wikipedia article for lowercase specifically states, and I quote:

lowercase is an extreme form of ambient minimalism in which very quiet sounds bookend long stretches of silence

So, are the examples you posted perhaps just a style of ambient music, or is the Wikipedia article just wrong?

[Danny Boy]

One does not simply trust Wikipedia

[Kman]

Pretty sure that article is just inaccurate cause all of the experts on the genre that I've talked with have shown me stuff like what I linked when I asked for examples of good lowercase

[PutraenusAlivius]

Well, I would say how it felt to me. Sad, anger, and others.... My personality is based on my taste in some art. If I hear/see anger, then I felt anger. If I hear/see sad, then I felt sad.

OFFTOPIC:
Just realized it said "How does one defiine good/bad taste in art, if at all?". Fix that.

[Kman]

OFFTOPIC:
Just realized it said "How does one defiine good/bad taste in art, if at all?". Fix that.

OMG WHY DOES IT MATTER

[Froge]

objectively good art




listen to 2:40 - 3:00

man the feels in that passage

[Kman]

ok but real talk here

objectively good and bad art doesn't exist and if you actually think it does then you're being a pretentious cunt

[Froge]

But technically you could consider anything to be art.

Therefore I propose that art must be something that can be evaluated using objective criteria in order to not just be anything.

This is easier with traditional classical music, where harmony creates rules for how to make pieces sound not like crap and compositions can also be analyzed structurally to determine their depth.

[Kman]

All I consider art to be is something that makes the person experiencing it feel some sort of emotion that was made with a creative intent

There aren't objective criteria for what makes art good and bad, because art is subjective to who's experiencing it. It varies from person to person, for you it obviously depends on how technically well written it is but for someone else it might be how energetic and fun it is and for someone else it could be how well certain instruments are played or how good the vocal are. Pretty much any artistic work can be good for any reason, because it's up to the person experiencing it to decide what makes it good to them. Even with that in mind having one definition for any form of art is pigeonholing it and is not only going to end up excluding a lot of stuff but it's going to stifle any forms of advancement or creativity.

I know very little about classical, but from the few compositions I have heard there most definitely has been a lot of experimentation with the genre past few years with incorporating elements from other genres like industrial and ambient to give the genre a fresh feel. If the only thing a classical composer set out to accomplish when they're writing a piece is to make it have depth and complexity and to have the melodies be pleasant, then a lot of experimentation and creativity that could be applied to the genre would be lost. For example, stuff like this would have never been created: