ion know bout that one bruh

classic!

Another point to add to you're argument is that the only objectivity in music is statistics, achievements, sales. There is some objective in that but people don't like to talk about those because Michael Jackson, Drake, Eminem, The Beatles and so on are all the best going by that but someone could argue against that

What i mean is that a user a few posts up posted the criteria by which kanye's music was better than another artist's and stated them to be objective. They arent, its a consensus of artists, reviewers and listeners to consider them criteria for a good song and are in no way objective.
Same goes for movies, books, comics, etc. There are criteria artist follow when making certain works and critics judge these works based on these criteria but they were chosen and are not objective

Yeah consensus is different for everyone because we go by different rules. I agree with you for that

Squirtle squad

at the end of the day youre correct. Art is completely subjective.

I think you can look at art subjectively and objectively.

Like you can compare the paintings of 2 people and say which one is the better drawer but still like the other painting more.

Eh, even that quality is in the eyes of the beholder

Lot of people would call someone like daniel johnston better over an artist who has a high production value

I like cherry bomb by Tyler a hell of a lot more than most mainstream pop music, but that album is mixed terribly and mainstream pop music sounds clean. Who’s to say that makes one objectively better than the other

Nope. When I say "bad audio quality" i don't mean, artistic clipping, muddy mix, i mean actually bad audio quality. You listen to this in your earphones and you will be in actual pain

Song structure was just an example of a quantifiable element, but the fact that you can argue about it is proof that there are objective elements

I agree

Also just historically there have been certain chords and harmonies that everybody finds more pleasing than other sounds so saying it is completely subjective is also kinda wrong.

this only applies to the western canon lol

Not everybody

Thats still an opinion. Its just the majority opinion

You ever watch this?

In terms of singing there are actually quantitative traits that can be observed, that determine your merit and skill.

So used to getting hit with that by Ye stans on here

even then majority is a vague term. eastern/middle eastern classical uses vastly different tonalities. unless what we're saying here is their opinion doesn't count

Yes and no. I was refering to people finding the sounds of instruments more pleasing than a jackhammer.

Otherwise why would we even make instruments in the first place?

Thank you for this

not particularly but adam had some great videos last year

For sure Adam is a real one. The stuff you’re saying ITT Adam goes into detail about in that video. Highly recommend you give it a watch when you have time!

@RVI @Biginthegame @thenewjimmorrison @02Shaq

Okay, for the purposes of clarity, lets define our terms.

OBJECTIVE: concerning the properties of an object in itself (this apple weights 1 newton)

SUBJECTIVE: concerning how an object is perceived by an individual. (red delicious apples are disgusting)

There are properties of songs that can be quantified, as I have previously stated, like audio quality, etc.

Then there are properties that cannot be quantified, ie, listener enjoyment, "vibe", genre (to a degree)

Concerning the quantifiable aspects of a song, we CAN say that songs are OBJECTIVELY better using commonplace metrics, ie. Kanye West - Good Morning is better than Blockboy JB freestyle because the vocal recordings aren't clipped to the high heavens and thereby accurately transmit the input data and do not contain frequencies which typically cause pain to human ears in loud enough volumes.

BuT MEEzYmesTiZO, wuT iF pEOpLe LIkE MUsIc WiTH loUD OuCHiE FreQuEnCIES.

Great, they exist, and that's fine, but that's a SUBJECTIVE judgement regarding perception and not qualities.

BUT HAH, you say, YOU JUST PROVED YOURSELF WRONG.

Nope. I think we could all agree that it is objectively better for my health if I get eight hours of sleep and don't chug eight litres of diet coke as I sit on the couch all day, as it will help me in common metrics like my cardiovascular performance. BUT KTT2, I LIKE BEING FAT AND MISERABLE.

See? If we resort to "but what if i like" then it defeats the entire purpose of using objective metrics in the first place and just devolves into lunacy. So while common metrics may be subverted by taste, that can be the case for any objective measure, rendering the entire line of enquiry pointless.

But I think there's a nugget of truth here in OP's original statement, in that OBJECTIVE judgements are not a substitute for, or necessarily, greater than subjective judgements when it comes to something which is consumed for enjoyment like music. We can't just whack people over the head with objective metrics of music as proof of quality. BUT that simultaneously does not mean we cannot say there is not objectively better music nor that we can't quantify aspects of music and assign value to them.