Dubstepforum.com

*DeCiBella~~ wrote:well isnt grey jus light black? and lime just light green? and violet jus light purple?

maybe grey is dark white. lime is greenish yellow and violet is reddish blue.

i love this guy intoccabile he's just so...

WEASEL!

ACIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIID!

x x x

Intoccabile wrote:You probably all know Adorno's views on aesthetic relativism but I will quote him anyway.

probably not the case! but i'd quite like to get into this - maybe later but not right now.

*DeCiBella~~ wrote:WEASEL!

ACIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIID!

x x x

nobody can beat the quaker

come on guys - this beats a this 'tune is so good thread!'

adorno can murk bare man!

i think deleuze can weigh in with some heavy bars on this subject though!

more later!

Intoccabile wrote: My question for you all is this ; do you believe that a thing such as an objective aesthetic judgment is possible ? And why ? Do you believe that it is possible to state essential truths about Dubstep, and music in general, truths which possess universal validity ?

Intoccabile:

As I understand it, Adorno had issues with pure relativism because - since he believed that all concepts had a social/power basis - it prevented people from separating the capitalism-derived concepts which served to keep people oppressed, from the liberating/beneficial concepts which he was in favour of. This ties in with his larger critique of mass culture in capitalism... I think that technological progress has answered some of his criticisms though.

Adorno claimed that under capitalism, mass culture was a passive medium which served to distract the people from what was really necessary for a fulfilling life: being free to create your own experiences and identity.

BUT - unlike in his day - we're no longer passive spectators being fed what corporations give us. Dubstep is a perfect example; Adorno's vision of a monopolistic culture industry distributing identical products to consumers still exists but it's not the only game in town. Because the things we need to produce our own scene are so cheap now, we can opt out of mass culture passive-tv-consuming bullshit, and be creative etc. on our own terms.

The Internet also is the ultimate rebuke to his problems with television and radio; there is no longer a "ruthless unity" of programming we have no say over.

So.... those are my initial thoughts.

*DeCiBella~~ wrote: hmmm, interesting, well isnt grey jus light black? and lime just light green? and violet jus light purple? oooooh you've started me on something now......

Decibella:

Colours are impossible to completely define using natural language; if you consider applying the Sorites Paradox to colour gradients, you can see that they're at best matters of consensus rather than something objective.

That is to say: for practical purposes humans act as if there's a real difference between, say, red and orange. Now, what we call orange is made up of "red" mixed in with a certain amount of yellow.

Like so:


If you were to pick out a boundry line on that picture where red definately stopped and orange began, I'd say: well, if you added 1/1000th percent more yellow to the tone on that boundry, would it stop being red and become orange? Yes if you claim there's a definate boundry, but no according to how people actually perceive colours.

*DeCiBella~~ wrote:
say a tune is produced diabolically, rubbish sounds, out of key, not mixed down properly etc then i would say universally, people (obv apart from the unfortunate soul who made it!) can and will come to the same conclusion and share the same and justified view... that it is a rubbish track.

...

so what im saying is that, depending of the quality of out put technically/musically (wotever), will be dependant of weather it can be judged with personal taste, or with a universal and just critical view of quality.....

What about punk though? Some people like the lofi sound!

There are certain "measureable" aspects to Dubstep because it's dance music. Most Dubstep tracks were designed with a specific purpose in mind: getting people to dance. Putting aside other value judgements, if the track doesn't make people move than it probably failed to accomplish the purpose it was made for.

As far as what you can say about Dubstep that's "universally valid"... the jury's still out on that and I hope it stays that way for a long time!

Great thread btw.

if someone can find me light red that couldn't be interpreted as pink I'll be very amused

Intoccabile wrote:My belief is that aesthetic judgments are partly subjective, and not entirely subjective, like a lot of people seem to believe.

I am of the belief that in this regard nothing is objective (if we assume that objectivity requires universal, irrefutable applicability). If a group can come to complete agreement on certain fundamentals which underpin value judgement (a simple example… a group could agree that ‘we want music to be challenging and stimulating, not hedonistic and pleasurable’) then we can begin to work towards making judgements which hold validity within that demographic, but what possibility is there of distilling some ideal which can apply to anyone?! to me its ludicrous to suppose that that is possible.

So to me the only sense in which we can approach ‘objectivity’, is by fundamentally changing what constitutes objectivity, by annexing conditions to it (at which point i believe it is just subjectivity on a larger scale).

*DeCiBella~~ wrote:say a tune is produced diabolically, rubbish sounds, out of key, not mixed down properly etc then i would say universally, people (obv apart from the unfortunate soul who made it!) can and will come to the same conclusion and share the same and justified view... that it is a rubbish track.

So from my perspective, that is only a rubbish track to ppl who value technically accomplished, clean mixdowns, established western scales, 'nice' samples etc. they are justified in their belief so far as they recognise that it is restricted to people who share these assumptions (preferences).

Intoccabile wrote:"True art can only survive if we destroy relativism. Because of it’s nihilistic, solipsist nature, relativism can never be refuted, since it would require the relativist to admit the value of what lies beyond his Ego. The tired counter that “relativism is relative” and refutes itself is ridiculous and unconvincing. The only cure is to show that relativists adopt that particular point of view simply because they are the product of an individualistic society (which is an objective entity) that promotes such views. Relativists think they are unique and clever, but are just puppets of a capitalist world that wants them to think so. Relativism is not a true philosophical point of view, but a mere social stereotype." - Adorno

The idea that relativism is born of ego while a search for objectivity is necessarily some valiant, selfless quest is utterly ridiculous! What could be more of an ego trip than being able to argue that what you believe is the TRUTH, not just your opinion. Surely the ego can push one to find an argument to validate ones opinion, rather than leave it impotent and local? I see that context made the debate something different for him, but that just goes in favour of his relativist opponents!

Coming to the end of a philosophy degree, I have to read this sort of material day in and day out.
Adorno, Foucault, aesthetic theory - inserting the word "dubstep" makes no difference, it's not what I come here for.

All intellectual masturbation outside, folks.

elgato wrote:

*DeCiBella~~ wrote:say a tune is produced diabolically, rubbish sounds, out of key, not mixed down properly etc then i would say universally, people (obv apart from the unfortunate soul who made it!) can and will come to the same conclusion and share the same and justified view... that it is a rubbish track.

So from my perspective, that is only a rubbish track to ppl who value technically accomplished, clean mixdowns, established western scales, 'nice' samples etc. they are justified in their belief so far as they recognise that it is restricted to people who share these assumptions (preferences).

The point im making is that, if the output quality is very poor, then regardless of audience (people with a musically trained ear or not) the overall finish will be undoubtedly poor, and thus sounding bad/wrong to everyone, which would be apparent.....

like i said in my 1st post, surley depending on the quality of output technically/musically (wotever), will be dependant of weather it can be judged with personal taste (musical preferance lighter tunes, darker tunes etc) or weather is is jus very poor quality and badly made....

surley tunes need to be of a certain standard to determinde wether they can be judged objectivly or subjectively? Me throwing a kick, snare, hat and bass together and saying its a tune, isnt really gonna cut it regardless of weather i play it to an average music fan or a badboy producer .... !

in my first post i also applied this theory to DJING which i think may illustrate my point even better, if a DJ clags it out then regardless of anything he will be a bad DJ and can be judged objectivly, but if a DJ is tight at mixing, then again because the output qualilty is good and of a certain standard, then it can be judged subjectivly.

x x x

Yeah DJ's should be first judged seperately on their technical skills and their selection, and then judged on a balance of the two just like all good music should be judged on its originality as well as people's instant reactions to it. Simplistic but most criticism is waaaaaaaay too pretentious!

the objective only ever exists in passing

You do sound like a bit of a cock expecting everyone to know Adorno's views on Relativism, but it's good to see an intellectual post.

I can see Adorno's point, however his views on most things (this included) are heavily tainted by his Socialist views. This is completely understandable considering the time in which he was writing and the presence of Facism throught the world. There always seems to be connection between a society and an individual in his work and very little inbetween, if groups consitute a thing inbetween the individual and society or something else entirely.

The idea of an objective opinion on a tune (whilst obviously an oxymoron as a term) doesn't seem possible. I don't know if a tune has as much weight outside of the dubstep community as it were, and this might be a better way to judge a tune. To me it seems that say when the bass comes in on Obeah - Copenhagen Massive it means an awful lot more to you or I than it does to David Badiel or Kevin Spacey. My opinion may indeed be relative in some regard, however I also have for more experience on which to judge its qualities and effect. I'd know that people would go slightly nuts if I played it in the right place (and may even say Brap if they were so inclined). This seems to be a rather important thing.

Soooooo.... What I may be saying is that a phenomiological examination of a tune in context (ie. the dubstep community/FWD>>/your mates front room) might serve as a better indicator or at least a more useful one than any individual opinion?

Erm, I can't be bothered to read that back. I've probably wandered off topic but n'mind.

@ Boom noise. Big up man like Deleuze everytime!

obIwan wrote:Yeah DJ's should be first judged seperately on their technical skills and their selection, and then judged on a balance of the two just like all good music should be judged on its originality as well as people's instant reactions to it. Simplistic but most criticism is waaaaaaaay too pretentious!

This is the point i was going to make, a "Bad DJ" itself is subjective....

There are loads of Djs who "can't mix, will try to mix even though i can't" who get gigs in student or cheese clubs....now someone must believe them to be a good DJ, just not me and many other people.

Crazydave wrote:Coming to the end of a philosophy degree, I have to read this sort of material day in and day out.
Adorno, Foucault, aesthetic theory - inserting the word "dubstep" makes no difference, it's not what I come here for.

well what you come here for is of course my main concern

orange is flourescent brown

*DeCiBella~~ wrote:The point im making is that, if the output quality is very poor, then regardless of audience (people with a musically trained ear or not) the overall finish will be undoubtedly poor, and thus sounding bad/wrong to everyone, which would be apparent.....

like i said in my 1st post, surley depending on the quality of output technically/musically (wotever), will be dependant of weather it can be judged with personal taste (musical preferance lighter tunes, darker tunes etc) or weather is is jus very poor quality and badly made....

x x x

yeh but part of music is its sound, its approach, all sorts, not just the melody etc. this is the key debate that always comes with grime - imo its a mistake to think of "good" or "bad" production - rather technically accomplished production, and intuitive or undeveloped production (or something!). some of the best grime is more or less what you describe - some kicks snares and synths thrown together, but they hit something amazing, which strikes something in a lot of people. and who is to say that those ppl are 'wrong' to feel that? would they necessarily feel that if it was crisp, balanced, and eq'd to 'perfection'?

the value music has to the listener depends entirely on that listener's preferences - with grime, half of what makes it incredible is that it sounds so raw... same with a lot of jungle, detroit techno, speed garage etc... for me, that gives it something deep, which would be lost if executed with all the precision that modern software allows.

*DeCiBella~~ wrote:in my first post i also applied this theory to DJING which i think may illustrate my point even better, if a DJ clags it out then regardless of anything he will be a bad DJ and can be judged objectivly, but if a DJ is tight at mixing, then again because the output qualilty is good and of a certain standard, then it can be judged subjectivly.

imo the only reason its different is because more people (here at least) agree on what makes a good dj, as Thomas said.

elgato wrote:yeh but part of music is its sound, its approach, all sorts, not just the melody etc. this is the key debate that always comes with grime - imo its a mistake to think of "good" or "bad" production - rather technically accomplished production, and intuitive or undeveloped production (or something!). some of the best grime is more or less what you describe - some kicks snares and synths thrown together, but they hit something amazing, which strikes something in a lot of people. and who is to say that those ppl are 'wrong' to feel that? would they necessarily feel that if it was crisp, balanced, and eq'd to 'perfection'the value music has to the listener depends entirely on that listener's preferences - with grime, half of what makes it incredible is that it sounds so raw... same with a lot of jungle, detroit techno, speed garage etc... for me, that gives it something deep, which would be lost if executed with all the precision that modern software allows.

im not saying anything is right or wrong here ...
infact what put me off drum and bass was how different it sounds now that everything is digital.....i adored the raw jungle/drum & bass sounds from when it was all Analogue and samplers, and i love acid house, which is very minimal and raw (can you imagine the equiptment back it 89!) ... so i fully appriciate that 'rawness' that your talking about. I dont think that everything being perfect and crispy means that its good quality....

I do see your point tho, as i suppose what is classed as good quality of output can differ from person to person.... .. ..
I just thought that if something sounds THAT awful mixing or production (im talking a musical train-wreck stylee!) then surley that would jus be apparent? and personal preference wouldnt come into it..?

x x x

unlikely wrote:orange is flourescent brown

haha! but brown has blue in it, no?