Music is subjective!!

Well, I saw a few have been claiming that Music is not SUBJECTIVE and are trying to shove their views down others throats. I say our opinion on music is purely SUBJECTIVE. "Subjective" means anything that is based purely on your own feelings and opinion. Taste is often a subjective matter: I may like music you don't like and vice versa. There's no right or wrong in subjectivity. Some like Rock & Roll some Jazz some old Hindi classical some latest fast beat no. So taste is subjective, but facts are not. "That is a beautiful song or a wonderfully sung song" is a subjective statement. "That is an oak tree" is an objective statement. So are all the other statements of science and mathematics. If you don't believe that's an oak tree, take a leaf of it and compare it to the leaf in a botanical text that is labeled "oak leaf."

An age-old similar discussion goes about music and math. But no analysis has ever been conclusive. There are probably as many examples as counter-examples. I'll give an ex of computer programming here…….. A program either works or it doesn't. Music is all subjective. You can be a fantastic musician or write a killer music composition yet the listener (i.e., user) would just say, "eh!" Of course, the more you write code the more you see the beauty in what makes a quality program and it often lies behind the scenes that a user doesn't see. Therefore its so much like sitting alone in a practice room for hours everyday pleased with accomplishments that only you can appreciate. Knowing you're doing it better than the day before is enough.

One parallel that always sticks with me was when my jazz professor told me about scales and their relationship to improvisation. He said, "you learn scales so you can forget them!" That is so true as a coder, learning basic syntax, structure, and form so you can forget them and move to the next level.

So lets forget abt FG1and wait for FG2 or ID2.
😃

Cheers,
Mink

Completely agree with ya, Mini di 👏 👏 👏

It's all a matter of individual taste 😃

hi mini....yes agree withyou..

your expliantion of what is subjective and what is objective.....on the spot........i liked the example of oak tree and comprassion of its leaves...... i say your expliantion is clinical and scientific.👏

Thank you Mink! Let me add my own little anecdote here - My professor at the Trinity College of Music said to us in our first lecture - "Your music is as good as your audience's applause! Never assume that you are superior because you have learnt music, and you know the difference between various notes and scales. There will be those who will not like what you play or compose. Do not deride them, for they have different tastes. Taste in music is like taste in food, and there's something for every palette."

Ya Minku, absolutely true. It totally individualistic, as taste is a thing which differs. 😊

hey mink, this is just to let you know i did actually read what you had to say about music being subjective, and i must say that i agree with you. 👏 and you have put it rather succinctly!

Thanks mink for the interpretation. Just let me add something said by Mozart, "music must never forget itself, it must never cease to be music."

There are no established rules or standards by which music is composed. What makes a thing objective is that by its very nature, it must adhere to certain standards or certain logic in order for that thing to be considered what it is. A triangle must, by its very definition, be a polygon with three connected sides whose internal angles add up to 180 degrees. Anything else, and the object would no longer be a triangle, by its very definition. Music, on the other hand, has no such logic or standards. There is no logical definition of music, such that a breach of that logic renders the output something other than music. Therefore, no objective standard exists for the composition or development of music.

Just as music has no logical definition to adhere to, neither can value judgments of music be objectified. There is no standard on which musical value is based. The value of music arises from a completely subjective and internal system -- the inspiration gained from a particular piece of music. Inspiration, by definition, is a subjective element of appreciation. If the subjective is the criteria for valuing music, then no objective value judgments could ever be made.

From these points we clearly see that the creation and appreciation of music is subjective in nature. The individual person makes, consciously or subconsciously, a set of fluctuating criteria by which they internally judge the worth of a selection of music. Some people like Mozart, others don't. Some like Boulez, others don't. This is not a contradiction; it is the recognition that both people are justified in their liking. One has no justification dictating to another what music she should appreciate or find inspiring.

And as far as music and maths are concerned, keep this in mind. Both math and music are appreciated in the
mind. The more you understand the sense of math, the more you appreciate its beauty. The same is true for music.

(nods head in total agreement while clapping vigourously)

good stuff mad_cap and very neat way of saying it too. to each their own and lets not try to impose our tastes on others.